The Anti-Spam Compliance Unit took to the road this week with a series of two-hour seminars on the Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act. I went along to the second session held on the North Shore. It was attended by around 60 business people, many of whom concerned about how they can lawfully use their valuable databases after September 5.
Manager of the Anti Spam Compliance Unit (part of the Department of Internal Affairs) Joe Stewart and senior policy advisor Lloyd Bezett were on hand to answer some pretty curly questions. But they admitted to being stumped about what to do with viral marketing – those friend-get-friend email campaigns which, under the law as it currently stands, could make a whole bunch of legitimate business liable for a $500,000 fine (the maximum penalty).
Another issue that Stewart highlighted was that feedback they’ve received shows that businesses are getting contradictory legal advice. There is such a diverse range of legal views that people are now emailing the DIA for clarification. Stewart says they will reply, but he stressed it wasn’t a legal opinion. Some of these questions and answers have already been ‘generalised’ and put up on the government’s antispam website.
It’s applaudable that the DIA is taking a proactive approach to consulting with the business community and Stewart is open about wanting to fix anything in the law that could damage good business practice.
But it was clear from the discussion at the seminar that an awful lot of legitimate internet use is going to be “technically in breach of the law” after September 5. For example, if I send an email to my friend advising her that a charity is holding a fun run and it costs $5 to enter, under this legislation, I’m a spammer.
Stewart made it clear that the Act is intended to catch the “bad guys”, those who clog the internet with spam that is fraudulent and criminal. And yes, spam is a huge issue that is economically and socially costly. But, should legitimate businesses, charities and non profit organisations be forced to break a law in order to carry out their work?