Politech mailing list archives
FC: Australia may legalize spamming, from Electronic Frontiers Aust.
From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 01:02:11 -0400
[So just as yet another bill is introduced in the U.S. Congress to ban spam, Australia is about to legalize it (if the below summary is accurate). So U.S. spammers rent server space in Australia and continue to clutter our mailboxes. We need technical anti-spam solutions: We can't trust governments. --Declan]
******* From: Irene Graham <rene () pobox com> To: declan () well com Subject: Australia to legalise spamming Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 11:26:03 +1000 Declan FYI below. Feel free to distribute it or an edited version on politech if you think it's of potential interest to your readers. Greg (the writer below) knows I'm sending it to you. Regards Irene ======Forwarded Message====== Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 20:27:28 +1000 From: Greg Taylor <gtaylor () efa org au> Subject: Australia to legalise spamming >From the same government that tried to censor the Internet last year comes new legislation that effectively gives the green light to spammers, under the guise of direct marketing. The Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 was tabled in the Australian House of Representatives in April 2000. The purpose of the Bill is ostensibly to extend the existing Privacy Act to the private sector. The Bill enshrines in legislation a modified version of the voluntary National Privacy Principles released by the Privacy Commissioner in February 1998. Principle 2.1 (see below) provides an exception to the Use and Disclosure Principle for direct marketing purposes. The draft Bill also provides exemptions from the Act for: - employee records - related bodies corporate - small business (defined as revenue less than $A3million) - media - political parties Pre-existing data is outside the scope of the law, and there are serious deficiencies in relation to health information. It is unlikely that this legislation will satisfy the EU Directive on Data Protection. To put it bluntly the Bill is a disaster. A House of Representatives Committee is now undertaking an inquiry into the Bill and receiving submissions from interested parties. Although the formal closing date for submissions was 12 May, the Committee will probably accept submissions until the end of May. Public hearings are also planned. Submissions may be sent by E-mail in text or Word format to: The Secretary House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600. AUSTRALIA Telephone: +61 2 6277 2358 Facsimile: +61 2 6277 4773 Email: laca.reps () aph gov au EFA and a number of other privacy advocates are preparing submissions. Although most of us want the Bill to be rejected by the Parliament, the reality is that the Bill is likely to pass in one form or another. The focus therefore is in pointing out the deficiencies in the Bill so that the opposition parties, who have the balance of power in the Senate, might succeed in incorporating amendments to eliminate the worst features of the Bill. Submissions, no matter how brief, from interested persons will be helpful. Comments addressing the spamming provisions would be particularly helpful. There is no paricular format required, just an E-mail in the form of a letter to the committee at the above address. Information about the inquiry, including a link to the Bill: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/laca/Privacybill/inqinf.htm National Privacy Principles 1999: http://www.privacy.gov.au/publications/index.html (A modified version of these principles is incorporated in the Bill) Greg Taylor Vice-chair Electronic Frontiers Australia http://www.efa.org.au --------------------------------------------------------------------- [Extract from the Bill endorsing direct marketing use of personal data] 139 At the end of the Act Add: Schedule 3--National Privacy Principles ........ 2 Use and disclosure 2.1 An organisation must not use or disclose personal information about an individual for a purpose (the secondary purpose) other than the primary purpose of collection unless: (a) both of the following apply: (i) the secondary purpose is related to the primary purpose of collection and, if the personal information is sensitive information, directly related to the primary purpose of collection; (ii) the individual would reasonably expect the organisation to use or disclose the information for the secondary purpose; or (b) the individual has consented to the use or disclosure; or (c) if the information is not sensitive information and the use of the information is for the secondary purpose of direct marketing: (i) it is impracticable for the organisation to seek the individual's consent before that particular use; and (ii) the organisation will not charge the individual for giving effect to a request by the individual to the organisation not to receive direct marketing communications; and (iii) the individual has not made a request to the organisation not to receive direct marketing communications; and (iv) the organisation gives the individual the express opportunity at the time of first contact to express a wish not to receive any further direct marketing communications; or (d) if the information is health information and the use or disclosure is necessary for research, or the compilation or analysis of statistics, relevant to public health or public safety: (i) it is impracticable for the organisation to seek the individual's consent before the use or disclosure; and (ii) the use or disclosure is conducted in accordance with guidelines approved by the Commissioner under section 95A for the purposes of this subparagraph; and (iii) in the case of disclosure--the organisation reasonably believes that the recipient of the health information will not disclose the health information, or personal information derived from the health information; or (e) the organisation reasonably believes that the use or disclosure is necessary to lessen or prevent: (i) a serious and imminent threat to an individual's life, health or safety; or (ii) a serious threat to public health or public safety; or (f) the organisation has reason to suspect that unlawful activity has been, is being or may be engaged in, and uses or discloses the personal information as a necessary part of its investigation of the matter or in reporting its concerns to relevant persons or authorities; or (g) the use or disclosure is required or authorised by or under law; or (h) the organisation reasonably believes that the use or disclosure is reasonably necessary for one or more of the following by or on behalf of an enforcement body: (i) the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution or punishment of criminal offences, breaches of a law imposing a penalty or sanction or breaches of a prescribed law; (ii) the enforcement of laws relating to the confiscation of the proceeds of crime; (iii) the protection of the public revenue; (iv) the prevention, detection, investigation or remedying of seriously improper conduct or prescribed conduct; (v) the preparation for, or conduct of, proceedings before any court or tribunal, or implementation of the orders of a court or tribunal. Note 1: It is not intended to deter organisations from lawfully co-operating with agencies performing law enforcement functions in the performance of their functions. Note 2: Subclause 2.1 does not override any existing legal obligations not to disclose personal information. Nothing in subclause 2.1 requires an organisation to disclose personal information; an organisation is always entitled not to disclose personal information in the absence of a legal obligation to disclose it. Note 3: An organisation is also subject to the requirements of National Privacy Principle 9 if it transfers personal information to a person in a foreign country. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- FC: Australia may legalize spamming, from Electronic Frontiers Aust. Declan McCullagh (May 14)