The original Bill stated that a printer charged with an offence would have to "prove that he could not reasonably have foreseen that [promotion] would be the effect of the advertisement".
But after lobbying from the BPIF, with support from Lord Lucas and input from the DTI, the wording has been changed to "a person does not commit an offence in connection with an advertisement if he could not reasonably have foreseen that that would be the effect of the advertisement".
BPIF head of legal affairs Anne Copley said: "Now the prosecution has to do all the work in showing the printer guilty, rather than the printer having to prove his innocence."
The Bill has its third and final reading in the House of Lords today (8 March) and will then enter the House of Commons, although a date for that stage is not yet available.
Story by Gordon Carson
Have your say in the Printweek Poll
Related stories
Latest comments
"And here's me thinking they bought the Docklands Light Railway."
"15 x members? Why don't they throw their lot in with the Strategic Mailing Partnership (SMP) and get a louder voice?"
"Some forty plus years ago I was at a "sales" training seminar and got chatting to the trainer after the session had finished.
In that conversation he told me about another seminar he had..."
Up next...
Customer demand increasing
A4 Laser Labels expands with larger site and kit investment
Price rises in US 'to at least partially offset' costs
Cimpress withdraws guidance due to Trump's tariffs
Proceeds to be invested in growth strategy
James Cropper sells some specialist IP
Making changes to limit tariff impact in US