So, now that we know when CASL will become enforceable, the next question in the minds of companies who send bulk mail on behalf of other companies is, “What specific liability accrues to the ESP that is used to transmit an infringing message under CASL?” I explore some answers here – reblogged from March of 2010.
Much analysis and guidance has been written about the new requirements (and significant penalties) imposed on senders of unsolicited e-mail by the Canadian Anti-Spam Law set to go into effect in the fall. What seems less thoroughly addressed to my non-lawyerly eyes is what specific liability is created by violations of CASL upon the ESP used by their clients to transmit the infringing commercial electronic message (CEM).
I put the question to Neil Schwartzman, a long-time colleague and Executive Director of CAUCE North America, one of the very earliest anti-spam advocacy groups and the primary driver of CASL through its storied journey across the Canadian legislative landscape. Neil recently left ReturnPath to start CASLconsulting.com, a firm offering expertise on CASL compliance. He and consulting legal counsel Shaun Brown of nNovation LLP respond:
View original post 411 more words