Again on a Parliamentary note, Bill
S-15 was recently read in the Senate. S-15 is interesting because
it deals with spam; junk email. The bill describes penalties for
spammers, establishes a do not spam list, and calls for a "Internet
Consumer Protection Council" which would set standards aimed at
reducing spam.
One slightly alarming thing is that anyone who wants to operate an
ISP would be required to be a member of the council. This is a barrier
to entry; another (potentially expensive?) hoop to jump through for
those wishing to start an ISP. On the other hand, the formative years
where kids started ISP's by buying a bunch of modems is arguably
over. We are now in a time when largish companies (i.e. containing
people who know how to jump through hoops and having the capital to do
so) control a basically mature market. With that in mind, perhaps
increased regulation with the aim of reducing spam is
appropriate.
ISP's are in violation of the act for not installing spam filters
which conform to the council's specifications. I guess this just puts
the force of law behind what should be business common sense by now.
Of greater interest is the establishment of a no-spam list. People
can request to be placed on the list, and it is the responsibility of
the spammers not to email anyone on that list. If someone who is on
the no-spam list receives spam, they must request action before
anything happens. Of course, there is the problem of tracking down and
punishing people who send spam, especially if the message originates
outside of Canada. I guess that's where the international co-operation
comes in. I suppose the complainant would be responsible for providing
initial evidence. Would the RCMP need to set up a task force to
investigate spam? How much power would they have to access ISP
records, and how with that work with privacy laws?
Considering the sheer volume of junk email, it could be an
interesting task to track down offenders. They would probably have to
set up a database of complaints and mine the routing information for
clues, and then go after only the most prolific senders.
Proposed penalties for spam range from a maximum $500 fine for
simple spam, to a maximum $5000 fine and/or up to six months in jail
for spam that contains child porn, sexually explicit material, or is
an attempt at fraud.
