Do Not Spam bill introduced in Senate with House of Commons due for another

Plans to prevent spam from being sent to unwilling recipients are picking up speed as the Canadian government’s two chambers are set to consider proposed legislation banning the practice. A bill has just been introduced in the Senate with similar legislation poised to be tabled in the House of Commons shortly. Nova Scotia senator Donald Oliver has introduced Bill S-23, An Act to prevent unsolicited messages on the Internet. Under the terms of the proposed law, the minister of industry will set up an Internet Consumer Protection Council that would represent the interests of ISPs and their customers. The council would be made up of seven directors, at least four of whom should be ISPs. All ISPs would be required to join the council as members and it could charge membership fees if it wished. The minister would consult with the Canadian Association of Internet Providers to determine how the council can carry out its duties in the most effective manner. That recognition is one of the few bright spots in the bill for CAIP. "It was a pleasant surprise to see that the senator had recognized our position in the industry and acknowledged that we have a role to play. But the rest of the bill causes us some concern," CAIP president Jay Thomson tells Network Letter. "We’re glad to see our politicians, both elected and in the Senate, take an interest in this issue because it is an important issue. But they do have to recognize that the ISP is as much a victim of spam as are consumers. We’re not to blame and if there’s going to be any legislation it should be targeted at the spammer and not the ISP industry." Oliver proposes the establishment of a no-spam list that would be kept confidential. Anyone wishing to send unsolicited email would have to ensure that targeted addresses are not on the list. Violation of that clause, by an individual spammer or by the ISP used by the spammer, could result in a $500 fine. More serious offences, such as child pornography, explicit sexual content or fraudulent promotions, are subject to a $1000 fine and/or a prison term of up to six months. Thomson worries about penalties being applied to ISPs that do not have the capability to monitor email. But the bill does offer an exit strategy for Internet carriers. "An Internet service provider who refuses or cancels service or access to any person who has committed an offence under this Act or who has, on more than one occasion, sent to the provider a message that the provider has reasonable grounds to believe is spam, is not liable to that person for any loss or damage arising from the refusal or cancellation," the legislation reads. One of the stranger provisions of the bill says an ISP "has reasonable grounds to believe that message is spam if the message fails to pass a spam filter approved by the Council." But spam filters can be notoriously finicky, barring legitimate messages while allowing unwanted material to slip through. Thomson regrets that he did not get a chance to discuss the terms of the bill with Oliver before the Progressive Conservative senator introduced the legislation. Oliver is currently travelling, but CAIP expects to meet with him next month to express its concerns. Thomson has been in touch with staff for Liberal MP Dan McTeague, who is championing his own anti-spam bill (NL, Sept. 2/03). He hopes to meet with him shortly. A spokesman for the MP from Ontario’s Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge riding tells NL the bill is in its final drafting stages and should be tabled in the House in two weeks or so.

Do Not Spam bill introduced in Senate with House of Commons due for another

News | September 29, 2003

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us