Essentially, one of the challenges we find with the existing implied consent regime is that it is defined by these narrow notions of the existing business relationship, existing non-business relationship. And as much as having a bright line test, where you clearly know if you're onside or offside, gives us certainty, it doesn't address the myriad of contexts in which consent can be reasonably inferred from the circumstances. Here's an example that was raised at the last meeting: someone's Facebook page. It's reasonable to infer that you would actually expect to receive messages that they're sending out--such as for campaign donations; you don't have express consent to do that, and implied consent, as drafted in the current bill, wouldn't cover that.
On September 30th, 2009. See this statement in context.