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 270: Roundtable on the Bill C-22 Risks for Canadian Tech Companies Featuring VPN Services Tailscale and Windscribe
byMichael Geist

May 25, 2026
Michael Geist
May 11, 2026
Michael Geist
May 4, 2026
Michael Geist
April 27, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 270: Roundtable on the Bill C-22 Risks for Canadian Tech Companies Featuring VPN Services Tailscale and Windscribe
RCMP Confirms Bill C-22 Concerns: Police Want Law to Provide Access to Encrypted Communications
More Misinformation on Bill C-22 as the Government Struggles to Defend Its Lawful Access Plan
The Phony Phone Book Analogy: How Liberal Cabinet Ministers and MPs are Misleading Canadians About the Privacy Risks of Bill C-22
Apple on Bill C-22: “This Bill Allows the Government of Canada to Force Companies to Break Encryption by Inserting Backdoors into their Products”
