Wiertz Sebastien - Privacy by Sebastien Wiertz (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/ahk6nh

Privacy

Descending Clouds by Gary Hayes (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/7RQ4wS

The Trouble with the TPP, Day 12: Restrictions on Data Localization Requirements

If all TPP countries implemented similarly strong privacy protections, there would be little need to consider alternative mechanisms to enhance public confidence in their privacy through additional legal safeguards. However, the Trouble with the TPP is that it actually weakens privacy protections by treating voluntary undertakings as equivalent to comprehensive privacy laws (prior posts include Day 1: US Blocks Balancing Provisions, Day 2: Locking in Digital Locks, Day 3: Copyright Term Extension, Day 4: Copyright Notice and Takedown Rules, Day 5: Rights Holders “Shall” vs. Users “May”, Day 6: Price of Entry, Day 7: Patent Term Extensions, Day 8: Locking in Biologics Protection, Day 9: Limits on Medical Devices and Pharma Data Collection, Day 10: Criminalization of Trade Secret Law, Day 11: Weak Privacy Standards). The TPP goes further in harming privacy, however, by restricting the use of data localization requirements that might otherwise be used to provide privacy protection.

Data localization has emerged as an increasingly popular legal method for providing some additional assurances about the privacy protection for personal information. Although heavily criticized by those who fear that it harms the free flow of information, requirements that personal information be stored within the local jurisdiction is an unsurprising reaction to concerns about the lost privacy protections if the data is stored elsewhere. Data localization requirements are popping up around the world with European requirements in countries such as Germany, Russia, and Greece; Asian requirements in Taiwan, Vietnam, and Malaysia; Australian requirements for health records, and Latin America requirements in Brazil. Canada has not been immune to the rules either with both British Columbia and Nova Scotia creating localization requirements for government data.

January 19, 2016 — 9 comments — News

Please! By Josh Hallett (CC-BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/yALRk

The Trouble with the TPP, Day 11: Weak Privacy Standards

The Trouble with the TPP continues this week with a series of posts on the TPP and privacy (prior posts include Day 1: US Blocks Balancing Provisions, Day 2: Locking in Digital Locks, Day 3: Copyright Term Extension, Day 4: Copyright Notice and Takedown Rules, Day 5: Rights Holders “Shall” vs. Users “May”, Day 6: Price of Entry, Day 7: Patent Term Extensions, Day 8: Locking in Biologics Protection, Day 9: Limits on Medical Devices and Pharma Data Collection, Day 10: Criminalization of Trade Secret Law). The inclusion of privacy within the TPP has been touted by governments as one of the benefits of the agreement, but the privacy provisions are so weak as to move global privacy backwards, weakening emerging international standards and locking countries into rules that restrict their ability to establish additional privacy safeguards.

While some have questioned the concerns associated with privacy and the TPP by arguing that it is it a trade agreement, not a privacy treaty, the reality is that the commercial importance of big data has never been greater. Indeed, it is odd to see some emphasize the importance of increased, harmonized intellectual property protections but simultaneously express satisfaction with bare minimum privacy protections that provide companies with a patchwork of rules and consumers without standardized protections. Personal information is a critical part of e-commerce and the need for public confidence in privacy protections alongside corporate certainty about their rights and obligations with the personal information they collect should be beyond debate.

January 18, 2016 — 3 comments — News

Protest against Bill C-51 - April 18, 2015 - Vancouver BC, Canada by Sally T. Buck (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/sdxnaW

Tech Law in 2016: Previewing Some of the Tough Policy Choices

Technology law and policy continues to command the attention of the public and policy makers. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that as Canada enters a new year with a new government, 2016 will be all about making tough choices on a wide range of technology law policies, including the following eight issues that are sure to generate headlines.

1. How will Bill C-51 be revamped?

Bill C-51, the Conservative government’s anti-terrorism bill, emerged as a major political issue last year as many expressed concern over the lack of oversight and the implications for privacy and civil liberties. The Liberal government has committed to reforms, but has been generally coy about what those changes will be. New accountability mechanisms will undoubtedly feature prominently in any reform package, but the substantive amendments to the bill remain a mystery.

January 5, 2016 — Comments are Disabled — Columns

Computer Keyboard by Marcie Casas (CC BY 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/99xKiL

The Letters of the Law: 2015 in Technology Law and Policy

With new trade agreements, a new government, new court cases, and new rules governing the Internet, law and technology issues garnered headlines all year long. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) takes a look back at 2015 from A to Z:

A is for the Ashley Madison data breach, which affected millions of people and placed the spotlight on online privacy.

B is for Bill C-51, the anti-terrorism bill, which became a flashpoint political issue on striking the right balance between surveillance and civil liberties.

C is for CBC v. SODRAC, a Supreme Court of Canada decision released in November that reinforced the significance of technological neutrality in copyright. The court sided with SODRAC, a copyright collective, on the need for payment for certain uses of music but ruled that an earlier rate-setting exercise had failed to account for the technological neutrality principle.

December 30, 2015 — 4 comments — Columns

Paris November 2015 by Roberto Maldeno (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/Bd5BLe

What Now? Privacy and Surveillance in Canada After the Paris Attacks

As the world grapples with the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, the policy implications for issues such as the acceptance of refugees and continued military participation in the fight against ISIL have unsurprisingly come to the fore. The attacks have also escalated calls to reconsider plans to reform Canadian privacy and surveillance law, a key election promise from the Trudeau government.

My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues that despite the temptation to slow the re-examination of Canadian privacy and surveillance policy, the government should stay the course. The Liberals voted for Bill C-51, the controversial anti-terror law, during the last Parliament, but promised changes to it if elected. Even in the face of a renewed terror threat, those changes remain essential and should not have an adverse impact on operational efforts to combat terror threats that might surface in Canada.

November 27, 2015 — 6 comments — Columns