CASL is more privacy law than anti-spam law

Michael Geist, a law professor in Canada, writes about the new CASL law, why it’s necessary and why it’s more about privacy and consumer protection than just about spam.

The law has at least three goals: provide Canada with tough anti-spam rules, require software companies to better inform consumers about their programs before installation, and update Canadian privacy standards by re-allocating who bears the cost for the use of personal information in the digital environment.

There are a lot of marketers out there that are really in a tizzy about CASL and about actually having to ask for and receive permission before sending mail to people. These are the same marketers who will tell you that they only do permission email. I’ve not quite gotten past the cognitive dissonance. They already do permission email, now they just actually have to keep some accurate records and have an audit trail.
The more cynical side of me says that the problem is that these senders who are stomping around ranting about how awful CASL is and how unfair are just pouty because they can no longer pretend they have permission. They actually have to have permission. They can’t bury an opt-in somewhere in a privacy policy, they have to have a real opt-in. They can’t tell a complainant “well, you opted in at some point, we just don’t know when” they have to be able to demonstrate the opt-in. They can’t just collect an email address and assume that address is a viable target forever, they have to either have a demonstrable relationship with the recipient or stop mailing the address after a few years.
Whenever I read about how awful CASL is, the underlying issue seems to me to be that marketers don’t like being told to stop taking permission from recipients. The marketers don’t like begin told they have to respect consumers. Not only that, they really hate that if they violate the law they may be held accountable for that.
Canada was one of the last western, industrialized nations to adopt an anti-spam law. I do not think it’s coincidence that CASL is extremely consumer friendly. Canada saw what happened with other laws and wrote a law that was a lot harder for marketers to ignore.

Don't wait to address delivery problems
Facts about engagement

Related Posts

Have fun storming the CASL!

I’ve given Humble Bundle my (tagged) email address a bunch of times – as part of purchases, as my username on their website, to download games and books I’ve bought.
And, naturally, they’ve sent me newsletters announcing when they have new sales. Did I check a checkbox or uncheck a checkbox? I don’t remember, and don’t really care. It’s a company I have a real relationship with and have purchased from, they’re sending content I want to see, and I trust them not to misuse my address and to honour an unsubscription request.
So … probably opt-in, and I’m fairly sure they’ve confirmed that it’s my email address. But did they explicitly tell me they’d use my email address for a newsletter? I and my email archive don’t remember that far back, and it’s quite possible that Humble Bundle’s current staff and records don’t either.
In todays newsletter, right above their talking about their summer sales, they had this:
 
All_Mailboxes__Found_118_matches_for_search_
 
They’re confirming that I want to keep getting newsletters, and stressing why I want to keep getting them. Their database probably dates back to the iron age, or at least 2010, and my clicking on the big, friendly green button both lets them know that I’m an engaged subscriber and lets them record in their database that “Yes! This subscriber has explicitly said they want our newsletters!”.
Gradually adding that information to their subscriber database will let them better make decisions in the future about what content to send, how often, whether to try and reengage with a subset of their subscribers.
Oh, and there’s CASL, of course.
If you or your recipients have a Canadian presence you have a little less than eighteen months to make sure you have documented, explicit consent from any recipients for whom you only have implicit (e.g. business relationship) consent or for whom you’ve lost the original records.

Read More

Ever changing filtering

One of the ongoing challenges sending email, and managing a high volume outbound mail server is dealing with the ongoing changes in filtering. Filters are not static, nor can they be. As ISPs and filtering companies identify new ways to separate out wanted email from unwanted email, spammers find new ways to make their mail look more like wanted mail.
This is one reason traps are useful to filtering companies. With traps there is no discussion about whether or not the mail was requested. No one with any connection to the email address opted in to receive mail. The mail was never requested. While it is possible for trap addresses to get on any list monitoring mail to spam traps is a way to monitor which senders don’t have good practices.
New filtering techniques are always evolving. I mentioned yesterday that Gmail was making filtering changes, and that this was causing a lot of delivery issues for senders. The other major challenge for Gmail is the personalized delivery they are doing. It’s harder and harder for senders to monitor their inbox delivery because almost every inbox is different at Gmail. I’ve seen different delivery in some of my own mailboxes at Gmail.
All of this makes email delivery an ongoing challenge.

Read More

Role accounts, ESPs and commercial email

There was a discussion today on a marketing list about role accounts and marketing lists. Some ESPs block mail to role accounts, and the discussion was about why and if this is a good practice. In order to answer that question, we really need to understand role accounts a little more.

Read More