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 250: Wikimedia’s Jan Gerlach on the Risks and Challenges with Digital Policy Reform
byMichael Geist

November 17, 2025
Michael Geist
November 10, 2025
Michael Geist
November 3, 2025
Michael Geist
October 27, 2025
Michael Geist
October 20, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
Reversing the Reversal?: Government Puts Privacy Invasive Lawful Access Back on the Agenda
Canadian Government Introduces New Stablecoin Act as Part of Budget Implementation Legislation
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 250: Wikimedia’s Jan Gerlach on the Risks and Challenges with Digital Policy Reform
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 249: The Debate Over Canada’s AI Strategy – My Consultation Submission and Appearance at the Canadian Heritage Committee
How the Liberal and Conservative Parties Have Quietly Colluded to Undermine the Privacy Rights of Canadians

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.