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 253: Guy Rub on the Unconvincing Case for a New Canadian Artists' Resale Right
byMichael Geist

December 8, 2025
Michael Geist
December 1, 2025
Michael Geist
November 24, 2025
Michael Geist
November 17, 2025
Michael Geist
November 10, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Catch-22 of Canadian Digital Sovereignty
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 253: Guy Rub on the Unconvincing Case for a New Canadian Artists’ Resale Right
The Most Unworkable Internet Law in the World: Quebec Opens the Door to Mandating Minimum French Content Quotas for User Generated Content on Social Media
CRTC Says No Regulatory Action Planned Against Meta For Blocking News Links
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 252: Len St-Aubin on the CRTC’s Plan To Modernize Canadian Content Rules

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.