My colleague Ian Kerr posts a great speech he recently delivered on the importance of privacy "idealism" in advocacy.
Kerr on Privacy Idealism
July 24, 2008
Share this post
One Comment
![Law Bytes](https://www.michaelgeist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Project.png)
Law Bytes
Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments
byMichael Geist
![Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments](https://www.michaelgeist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Project.png)
July 15, 2024
Michael Geist
June 24, 2024
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 210: Meredith Lilly on the Trade Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax and Mandated Streaming Payments
Abandoning Institutional Neutrality: Why the University of Windsor Encampment Agreements Constrain Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 209: Peter Menzies on Why the Canadian News Sector is Broken and How to Fix It
Why the University of Windsor Encampment Agreement Violates Antisemitism and Academic Freedom Standards
Know When to Fold Em: The Big Risk Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax Bet
privacy idealism
Great food for thought, Ian. After reading it, my conundrum is this: If the privacy by design pragmatist approach really means thinking of privacy at the outset of something, does it not merge with the idealist approach when that thinking at the outset can’t find a way to protect privacy and thus ends it there? And does that thought make me a pragmatist or an idealist about the pragmatist approach?