From here:
The purpose of the bill is generally to prohibit the sending of commercial and promotional electronic messages to or from New Zealand where the recipient has not consented, or withdraws their consent, to receiving that message. ...The perpetrator of an offence under the Act is liable to a penalty of up to $200,000.00 (if an individual) or $500,000.00 (if an organisation). In addition, the perpetrator can be ordered to pay a victim compensation for loss suffered, and/or damages equal to the financial benefit obtained by the perpetrator as a result of the offence.
[That's about US$120k and US$280k at current exchange rates]
...
... The bill covers the sending of commercial and promotional electronic messages from or to New Zealand, whether or not an intended recipient's electronic address exists or the message reaches its intended destination.
The message can be in the form of text, writing, data, speech, music or other sounds, or visual images. Faxes and voice calls (including calls using a recorded or synthesized voice) made using the standard telephone system or voice-over internet protocol (VOIP) are not covered.
...
The bill also prohibits the supply of address harvesting software or address lists produced by such software, unless the supplier had no reason to suspect that the software or list would be used in connection with sending unsolicited commercial or promotional electronic messages.
The supplier also has a defence if he or she did not know, or could not reasonably have known, that the recipient was physically present in New Zealand, or carried on business in New Zealand at the relevant time. This second defence is puzzling, given that the Act prohibits commercial or promotional emails being sent to, as well as from, New Zealand.
...
It is somewhat ironic that the bill is unlikely to have little, if any, impact on the bulk of spam originating overseas. This is due to the difficulty of enforcement outside New Zealand. Indeed it is noted in Parliaments own commentary on the bill that the proposed legislation would not impact the US "SPAM top 10 hit list", a veritable smorgasbord of old favourites advertising adult sites, 'performnane' drugs and dubious financial schemes among others.
...Despite the additional burden of compliance on New Zealand business and the potential for unwitting scapegoats, it is imperative that anti-spam legislation is enacted in New Zealand. To fail to do so could allow New Zealand to become a haven to spammers.
Recent Comments