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 232: What Will Canadian Digital Policy Look Like Under the New Liberal Carney Government?
byMichael Geist

May 5, 2025
Michael Geist
March 31, 2025
Michael Geist
March 24, 2025
Michael Geist
March 10, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
When the Drumbeat of Intolerance Becomes Too Loud to Ignore: Reflections on Campus Antisemitism, Academic Freedom and My Global Technology Law Exchange Course
Solomon’s Choice: Charting the Future of AI Policy in Canada
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 232: What Will Canadian Digital Policy Look Like Under the New Liberal Carney Government?
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 231: Sara Bannerman on How Canadian Political Parties Maximize Voter Data Collection and Minimize Privacy Safeguards
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 230: Aengus Bridgman on the 2025 Federal Election, Social Media Platforms, and Misinformation
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.