In its decision no. 172/20, the Swiss Commission for Fairness (SLK) dealt with the question of when the sending of electronic advertising messages is “mass” (within the meaning of Art. 3 para. 1 lit. o UCA). In doing so, it stated that it is not the number of e‑mails sent (“quantitative approach”) that is important, but rather the number of e‑mails sent.
Posts related to
UWG 3 I lit. o
Motion Christ (20.3113): Put an end to mountains of paper waste. Opt-in instead of opt-out solution for unaddressed advertising mailings.
Motion Christ (20.3113): Put an end to mountains of paper waste. Opt-in instead of opt-out solution for unaddressed advertising mailings Submitted text The Federal Council is instructed to adapt the legislation so that there is a change from the current opt-out system to an opt-in system for unaddressed mailbox advertising. Advertising should only be received by those who explicitly want it. Otherwise
Interpellation Marti (19.3659): Swisscom launches data octopus Beem: How is this compatible with the Confederation’s ownership strategy?
Interpellation Marti (19.3659): Swisscom launches data octopus Beem: How is this compatible with the Confederation’s ownership strategy? Submitted text In recent weeks, the public has been informed about extensive technological changes in the advertising market. With Beem, Swisscom wants to make “classic advertising campaigns interactive and smartphone-enabled,” as stated in
OGer ZH (6.2.18): Application of Art. 3 para. 1 lit. o UWG (ban on spam) failed due to de minimis threshold
In February 2018, the Zurich Supreme Court protected a non-acceptance order of the Zurich-Sihl public prosecutor’s office (Decision UE170371 of Feb. 6, 2018, Swisslex). It concerned three unsolicited emails from a Peruvian law firm that reached the complainant and his office colleague. The addressee, an unnamed (but easily identifiable) intellectual property law practitioner, was sent
Explanations on spam Source: FDPIC – General principles
A perennial hot topic among data privacy issues is the trade in addresses and personal data for marketing purposes. The fact that this trade is flourishing is shown by the volume of unsolicited advertising mailings and calls, which can become a nuisance for many citizens. Although the Data Protection Act does not prohibit the trade in addresses, it sets