Industry committee  Yes, the opening is there. If you look at clause 10(3)(c), it reads as follows: (c) the person to whom the message is sent has disclosed, to the person who sends the message, the person who causes it to be sent or the person who permits it to be sent, the electronic address to

Industry committee  —expressly given—

Industry committee  Yes.

Industry committee  Yes. Businesses have a legitimate concern. I don't pretend that any time a new source of legal worry and fret is created that it is without its costs and concerns for the business community in particular. The question is on balance, I guess, whether the evils that might arise fro

Industry committee  Yes. In my view, the issue is a very small one. It relates to the headers and address information contained in e-mails. Their suggestion relates to the materiality test, which applies to other kinds and classes of representation. So when you're looking, for instance, at the body

Industry committee  That's a very good question. The jurisdictional clause is designed to permit enforcement on behalf of Canadians. Now, as you're aware, telecommunications service providers are not liable for carrying traffic. So if there were traffic between Los Angeles and New York that is in t

Industry committee  Their regular business, yes.

Industry committee  In appearances before the committee and in representations that have been made to Industry Canada over the summer, we have had a number of variants on the idea that instead of having a due diligence defence there should be a defence of honest mistake; in fact, inadvertence. Our

Industry committee  I think you are right as far as businesses go, although you must remember there are a lot of small businesses that haven't automated their e-mail lists and those kinds of thing. So it does give people time, and presumably it will even out the demand for tech services somewhat. T

Industry committee  Could I make a supplemental observation on that? The regulatory powers we have asked for have all been within the context of the ability to expand and ease what otherwise might create difficulties for legitimate activities. The opposing theory is that every time a new evil arise

Industry committee  It is specific to the relationship you have. We've used the word “solely” here, so that it is solely information about the relationship you have.

Industry committee  That's right.

Industry committee  Yes, it was carefully considered. It was in the context of the very basis of the act. In that case, the problem was what's called a freebie. Technically, a spammer can very well send only one e-mail, but address it to a number of businesses, companies or sectors. It's technically

Industry committee  In my opinion, we've brought in major amendments in response to industry concerns, especially in two areas. First, there is the sending of messages between businesses in the course of business operations. On that point, we've advanced the idea of open publication of e-mail. This