Magnavox

For once Slashdot editors/submitters aren't to blame...the linked bulletin makes reference to it being out-of-band as well.

I hope Bennett doesn't see this and start including rules for how we're allowed to reply to his posts...

Looks like she's out in the middle of nowhere. Definitely not the burbs anyway. What harm is a bike ride if she doesn't come in contact with anybody

No, they are likely exempt. Being 100% security related is only an exception for one of the two conditions.

And as stated before, ads are not the only thing that can cause a message to be deemed a commercial electronic message, so it's not as simple as "do we have ads? no? then it must be ok to send".

If it's easier for you to blame Microsoft than to realize this legislation is a real problem for many organizations, then that's cool, you're entitled to your opinion and I'll stop trying to change it.

If they're 100% security related, then they likely are exempt. The problem for Microsoft is making sure that they currently are 100% security related, and continue to be 100% security related in the future. The second they introduce non-security related content of a "commercial character", the law applies.

The problem is the FAQ gives a non-exhaustive list of examples. It's pretty much impossible to tell what is covered and what is not because the definition of Commercial Electronic Message depends on the definition of Commercial Activity, which in turn depends on the definition of Commercial Character, which is not defined.

(I just posted relevant quotes in a message above this one if someone wants quick reference for the two definitions).

CASL covers much more than just that. It covers all types of commercial electronic messages, where CEMs are defined as:

For the purposes of this Act, a commercial electronic message is an electronic message that, having regard to the content of the message, the hyperlinks in the message to content on a website or other database, or the contact information contained in the message, it would be reasonable to conclude has as its purpose, or one of its purposes, to encourage participation in a commercial activity.

Then "commercial activity" is defined as:

"commercial activity" means any particular transaction, act or conduct or any regular course of conduct that is of a commercial character, whether or not the person who carries it out does so in the expectation of profit, other than any transaction, act or conduct that is carried out for the purposes of law enforcement, public safety, the protection of Canada, the conduct of international affairs or the defence of Canada.

Then there is no definition of "commercial character" so you're at a dead end. If you call in and ask, they say they have no clue, it'll be up to the courts to sort it out if/when lawsuits are filed.

Tell that to Issac Ramirez. Sure, it was a $199 VCR and not a $49 whatever, but yes with some of those crazy three strikes laws you may find yourself in prison for some pretty stupid reasons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law#Cases

I'll bet the guy who said "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high." expected the police to do the same thing. Guess how that turned out for him.

As if people citing wikipedia wasn't bad enough, you're getting your facts from some random angelfire hosted webpage?