PrivacyScan is reporting that the Privacy Commissioner is about to release a finding that the LSAT fingerprinting requirement violates Canadian privacy law. The Commissioner rejected arguments that the test is non-commercial and thus outside PIPEDA. Moreover, she found that there are less privacy invasive mechanisms to address concerns about fraudulent test taking. A full decision release is expected within weeks.
Privacy Commissioner Rules that LSAT Fingerprinting Violates the Law
June 22, 2007
Share this post
One Comment

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
Fingerprinting the Innocent
A few of us sitting in a pub the other day started talking about fingerprinting and privacy. The question we came up with was, ‘why are people fingerprinted immediately after being arrested but before being charged?’ Example, as a 17 year old I was picked up for shop lifiting, I was fingerprinted and photographed. However, I was released and charges were dropped. Why were those steps taken over something so minor?
Thanks.