CRTC fines Compu-Finder $1.1 million for CASL violations

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is the principle agency tasked with enforcing Canada’s anti-spam law. Today they issued a Notice of Violation to Compu-Finder  including a $1.1 million dollar fine for 4 violations of CASL. The violations include sending unsolicited email and having a non-working unsubscribe link. According to the CRTC, complaints about Compu-Finder accounted for 26% of all complaints submitted about this industry sector.
This is the first major fine announced under CASL.
One of the first things that jumped out at me about this is the action was taken against B2B mail. There are a lot of senders out there who think nothing of sending unsolicited emails to business addresses. In my experience, many B2B senders think permission is much less important for them than B2C senders. I think that this enforcement action demonstrates that, at least to the CRTC, permission is required for B2B mail.
The other thing that jumped out is that given the extent of the complaints (26%) the financial penalties were only slightly more than 10% of the $10M maximum penalty. It seems the CRTC is not blindly applying the maximum penalty, but is instead actually applying some discretion to the fines.
I’ve looked for the actual notice of violation, but haven’t been able to find a copy. If I find it, I will share.
 
 
 
 

Ransomware email protected by DMARC
Engagement, ISPs and the EEC

Related Posts

Language as filtering criteria

A few months ago I was working on a delivery audit for a client who sends mail in multiple languages. We discovered that the language of an email has a significant delivery impact. The same email in different languages was delivered differently, particularly at Gmail. Emails in a language I don’t normally receive email in were delivered to my bulk folder.
Other folks have commented on similar things. Some filters really do look at preferred language of the recipient and treat mail in other languages as problematic. I don’t think that’s unreasonable. I do get a lot of foreign language spam and there’s no real way to stop it. Many countries don’t require opt-out links, and so there isn’t a clear way to even unsubscribe.
Writing in the recipient’s local language is one way to minimize inappropriate blocking, even when you have permission to send mail.
 
 

Read More

CASL enforcement

As most people know, the Canadian Anti-Spam Law (CASL) went into effect July 1 of this year. This month, the CRTC concluded its first investigation.

Read More

Dodging filters makes for effective spamming

Spam is still 80 – 90% of global email volume, depending on which study look at. Most of that spam doesn’t make it to the inbox; ISPs reject a lot of it during the SMTP transaction and put much of rest of it in the bulk folder. But as the volumes of spam have grown, ISPs and filters are relying more and more on automation. Gone are the days when a team of people could manually review spam and tune filters. There’s just too much of it out there for it to be cost effective to manually review filters.
In some ways, though, automatic filters are easier to avoid than manual filters. Take a spam that I received at multiple addresses today. It’s an advertisement for lists to “meet my marketing needs.” I started out looking at this mail to walk readers through all of the reasons I distrusted this mail. But some testing, the same sorts of testing I do for client mails, told me that this mail was making it to the inbox at major ISPs.
What told me this mail was spam? Let’s look at the evidence.
listsellingspam_thumb

Read More