In response to my recent Toronto Star column (Toronto Star version, HTML backup article, homepage version) defending PIPEDA, Canada’s privacy law, the paper today features a debate over the arguments presented in that column. Professor Richard Owens argues that PIPEDA “tarnishes lawmaking, impedes business unnecessarily and threatens constitutional disorder”, while I continue to defend the privacy statute, maintaining that the historical record suggests that business actively upported the law and the establishment of a national standard in its current form. also see: Owens Rebuttal
The Debate Over Privacy Law Continues
February 6, 2004
Share this post

Law Bytes
Episode 235: Teresa Scassa on the Alberta Clearview AI Ruling That Could Have a Big Impact on Privacy and Generative AI
byMichael Geist

May 5, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
Why the Government’s Plan for Warrantless Access to Internet Subscriber Information Will Lead to Millions of Disclosure Demands Each Year
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 235: Teresa Scassa on the Alberta Clearview AI Ruling That Could Have a Big Impact on Privacy and Generative AI
What Is With This Government and Privacy?: Political Party Privacy Safeguards Removed in “Affordability Measures” Bill
More Than Just Phone Book Data: Why the Government is Dangerously Misleading on its Warrantless Demands for Internet Subscriber Information
Privacy At Risk: Government Buries Lawful Access Provisions in New Border Bill