Warning
Info
Warning
Info
Simple English definitions for legal terms
The U.S. Legal Context: Privacy, Commercial Solicitation, and Commercial Speech
Read a random definition: proprio jure
A quick definition of The U.S. Legal Context: Privacy, Commercial Solicitation, and Commercial Speech:
The U.S. has different laws to protect people's privacy in different situations, but there is no general law for privacy. Some laws require people to say "yes" before their information can be shared, while others allow people to say "no" after they have been told how their information will be used. The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 is a law that allows businesses to send emails to people unless they say "no." The U.S. also has laws to stop companies from calling people's phones to sell things, and people can choose to be on a "do-not-call" list. The U.S. Constitution protects the right to talk about business, but the government can still make rules to protect people from false or harmful information.A more thorough explanation:
The U.S. legal approach to privacy and the use of technology for commercial solicitation is reflected in the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. The Act is consistent with the U.S. statutory approach to privacy, which is context-specific and often based on an "opt-out" approach. This means that commercial actors can collect and share information unless individuals explicitly opt-out. The U.S. also has constitutional protection for commercial speech under the First Amendment, which allows for some regulation of commercial solicitation but with lower protection than other types of speech.
The U.S. does not have a general federal privacy statute but instead has specific laws for different contexts. For example, HIPAA and COPPA have an "opt-in" approach to privacy for health-related and children's information, while the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act has an "opt-out" approach for financial institutions. The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 also has an "opt-out" approach for commercial email.
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act regulate telemarketing and telephonic commercial solicitation. These laws restrict the use of certain technologies and created a "do-not-call" registry. The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 follows a similar pattern in regulating commercial email and spam.
The First Amendment protects commercial speech, but with lower protection than other types of speech. Regulations can limit commercial speech as long as they are designed to achieve a substantial state objective. Unlawful or misleading commercial speech is not protected by the First Amendment.
The CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 allows companies to send commercial emails to individuals unless they explicitly opt-out. This means that individuals may receive unwanted emails unless they take action to stop them. However, the Act also requires companies to include an opt-out mechanism in their emails and prohibits misleading subject lines and false headers.
This example illustrates the U.S. statutory approach to privacy, which is context-specific and often based on an "opt-out" approach. It also shows how the First Amendment allows for some regulation of commercial speech, but with lower protection than other types of speech.
The Canadian Legal Context: PIPEDA, Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications, and the Competition Act | theft