Sure.
With respect to Australia, respectfully, my reading is different. I have the Australian act in front of me, and it refers to commercial electronic messages in much the same way. I don't see a significant difference on the definitional side.
Part 2, subsection 16(1), of the Australian act says:
A person must not send, or cause to be sent, a commercial electronic message that...has an Australian link...and...is not a designated commercial electronic message.
Then you go into the definitions.
It frankly mirrors a lot of what we've done. I think it was noted by my colleague here that it's pretty clear Canada borrowed fairly heavily from the legislation you find in other countries. So I actually don't see the first premise; I don't see that focus on direct marketing the way that you suggested. I see statutes that talk about commercial electronic messages in much the same way we do.
Then you get into this other basket. As I mentioned off the top, everything is permitted; there's nothing that you can't do. The only question is whether or not you have to get someone's consent in order to do it. The exceptions we're talking about—the notion of a business, for 18 months after they have an actual relationship, or six months after an enquiry, or political parties, or charities, and all these other exceptions—are exceptions to the notion that they don't even need to get that.
That strikes me as providing pretty wide latitude. All a business has to do in every one of these circumstances is get consent from the customer; then they're okay.
Then you get into the second basket, where you say “I don't want to get consent from the customer”, and we're still giving them quite a wide berth to continue to market to consumers.