James Watt is facing complaints to the UK data watchdog after emailing thousands of former BrewDog investors about his new beer venture and buyback plans.
Several former Equity Punks ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to examine how the BrewDog co-founder obtained their contact details and whether he used them lawfully.
The emails invited investors whose BrewDog shares became effectively worthless to claim the same stake in Watt’s new company Second Best without charge.
Watt later used the venture to launch a bid to buy BrewDog back from US owner Tilray Brands, claiming 43,000 former investors supported the offer.
Some recipients said they did not understand how Watt accessed their email addresses, while others noted that earlier requests to delete their details should have prevented the contact.
Former Equity Punk Marc Knox said the messages prompted recipients to ask: “How has this joker got my details?”
Watt denies any wrongdoing and says the communication followed legal advice, used “lawfully obtained data” and served shareholders’ legitimate interests.
He pointed to BrewDog’s shareholder register as a public document, but did not explain how the email addresses used for the campaign were obtained.
Tilray says it did not acquire Equity for Punks shareholder data when it bought BrewDog’s brand and key assets for £33 million in March. It added that it did not authorise or assist Watt’s communications.
The records system remains under the control of BrewDog plc, which is in administration, while administrator AlixPartners also denies providing Watt with the information.
The ICO says it is aware of the incident and is assessing the information supplied. It made no finding that Watt, Second Best or any other party broke data protection law.
Does contacting the investors break the law?
The legal question extends beyond whether shareholder information is publicly accessible.
Organisations need a lawful basis to process personal data under the UK GDPR and must handle it fairly and transparently. A claim of legitimate interests requires the organisation to show that the use is necessary and does not override the rights of the people concerned.
The messages may also fall under the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations if the ICO considers them direct marketing.
ICO guidance says businesses generally need specific consent to send marketing emails to individuals. A limited “soft opt-in” applies to a company’s own existing customers when it promotes similar products and provides clear opportunities to unsubscribe.
The regulator also says legitimate interests cannot replace consent when the electronic marketing rules require it.
Data protection lawyer Ravi Naik says it remains unclear whether a breach took place but questions how recipients were selected and whether the campaign complied with the law.
The complaints follow Watt’s attempt to regain control of BrewDog after its rescue sale wiped out the holdings of more than 200,000 crowdfunding investors. Tilray chief executive Irwin Simon told Retail Gazette that the brewer is “not for sale”.
Click here to sign up to Retail Gazette‘s free daily email newsletter
