CRTC Penalizes Small Business Owner For Attempting to Promote Business – Time to Reform CASL to Allow Companies to Compete?

CANADIAN CASL (ANTI-SPAM LAW) PRECEDENTS

Do you need a precedent or checklist
to comply with CASL (Canadian anti-spam law)?

We offer Canadian anti-spam law (CASL) precedents and checklists to help electronic marketers comply with CASL.  These include checklists and precedents for express consent requests (including on behalf of third parties), sender identification information, unsubscribe mechanisms, business related exemptions and types of implied consent and documenting consent and scrubbing distribution lists.  We also offer a CASL corporate compliance program.  For more information or to order, see: Anti-Spam (CASL) Precedents/Forms.  If you would like to discuss CASL legal advice or for other advertising or marketing in Canada, including contests/sweepstakes, contact us: contact.

**********

On March 9, 2017, the Canadian CRTC announced that it had imposed a $15,000 administrative monetary penalty on an individual who allegedly engaged in electronic marketing to promote the sale of commercial flyers, without complying with CASL’s (Canada’s anti-spam law) consent, identification and in some cases unsubscribe requirements.

The fundamental requirements of CASL relate to obtaining express consent (or meeting an exception or category of implied consent), identification (in both consent requests and commercial electronic communications) and including an easy unsubscribe mechanism in electronic communications. It is critical for electronic marketers to precisely meet CASL’s basic consent, identification and unsubscribe requirements.

While the size of the penalty in this case may not seem significant by corporate measures, it nevertheless is a clear indication that the CRTC is quite willing to take enforcement measures against not only corporations but also individuals and smaller marketers. The penalties imposed to date under Canada’s anti-spam legislation have ranged from AMPs in the range imposed in this case to slightly over $1 million.

This case is also unfortunately a clear illustration of the potential impacts on small and medium sized-businesses’ attempts to market and comply with a difficult, unclear, expensive and cumbersome law.

Having said that, this case does somewhat help to further decode the CRTC’s investigation and enforcement methods. In this regard, some key aspects of this recent decision include:

1. The respondent received a penalty of $15,000 for 58 e-mails (by my math, about $258 per e-mail).  It is slightly difficult to understand the consumer harm stemming from 58 e-mails.

2. The conduct occurred over a relatively short period (about three and half months).

3. The CRTC received submissions from 50 individuals through its Spam Reporting Centre relating to the alleged infringements. The practical lesson for marketers here is that annoyed recipients – even on a relatively small scale, as in this case – may lead to enforcement and penalties.

4. The CRTC’s investigation occurred about two years after the activities, but it did proceed. This indicates that there may currently be some lag or delay reflected in the CRTC’s enforcement and that companies that violated CASL relatively soon after its coming into force may still face enforcement. One does wonder, however, about the cost of an approximately 3-year investigation to carry out enforcement against a sender of 58 e-mails.

5. The CRTC describes its Internet forensic methods in some detail that led it to conclude that the e-mails were being sent by the respondent and from his IP address.

6. The CRTC rejected claims that the marketer’s e-mails were sent by 3rd party boarders or others, as claimed by the respondent, which the CRTC concluded was unfounded.

One of the most important questions raised by this recent case is whether it is now time to amend CASL to allow Canadian companies to compete with U.S. and international companies without facing unclear regulation and potentially significant penalties, particularly given the impending private action rights that will come into force this July.

____________________

SERVICES AND CONTACT

I am a Toronto competition/antitrust lawyer and advertising/marketing lawyer who helps clients in Toronto, Canada and the US practically navigate Canada’s advertising and marketing laws and offers Canadian advertising/marketing law services in relation to print, online, new media, social media and e-mail marketing.

My Canadian advertising/marketing law services include advice in relation to: anti-spam legislation (CASL); Competition Bureau complaints; the general misleading advertising provisions of the federal Competition Act; Internet, new media and social media advertising and marketing; promotional contests (sweepstakes); and sales and promotions. I also provide advice relating to specific types of advertising issues, including performance claims, testimonials, disclaimers, drip pricing, astroturfing and native advertising.

For more information about my services, see: services

To contact me about a potential legal matter, see: contact

For more regulatory law updates follow me on Twitter: @CanadaAttorney

This entry was posted in Advertising Law, Anti-spam Law, Articles, Associations, Compliance, Consumer Protection, CRTC, Direct Sales, Do Not Call List, Electronic Marketing, New Publications, News, Online Advertising, Sectors - Broadcasting, Sectors - Internet & New Media, Sectors - Media, Sectors - Retail, Social media marketing and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.