Privacy Breaches: Obligations and Pending Changes to PIPEDA (Video)

March 23, 2012

Has one of your organization’s employees lost their iPhone or Blackberry recently?  How about misplaced a file?  If those devices or files contain personal information, you may have suffered a privacy breach.  To learn more about how to deal with a privacy breach please watch this short video – click here>>


Internet cached webpages: What are they and how can you deal with them?

March 15, 2012

During the course of my practice I’m often asked to provide social media law advice, typically to organizations or individuals who want defamatory, proprietary or privacy invasive content removed from the Internet.  Once content has been successfully removed from a website I often discuss with clients issues related to Internet cached webpages.  So I thought it would be helpful to provide some general information on what Internet cached webpages are and how you can deal with them in situations where you don’t want to have certain content available online.

What are Internet cached webpages? 

When search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Bing crawl a website, they take a snapshot of what the site looks like at that time. This “snapshot” is known as a cached webpage and it’s stored by the search engine. The cached webpage is what the search engine then uses to determine whether the site matches a user’s specific query.

When a user clicks on the cached webpage, they will be taken to the version of the webpage that was online when the site was last crawled and not the current version. The cached webpage can be accessed when the current version of the site is unavailable due to Internet congestion, a slow website, or the webpage has recently been removed.

How can you deal with Internet cached webpages?

It is very difficult to remove a cached webpage from a search engine if you’re not the webmaster of the website. If you’re not the webmaster and you’d like a cached page removed from Google, Yahoo or Bing, you have three options:

  1. You can contact the site administrator and ask them to take the steps necessary to have the cached webpage removed from the search engine in question. Google typically responds to such requests from webmasters within 2-3 hours and Yahoo typically responds in 5 hours;
  2. You can seek a court order or other legal document to have certain content removed from the website/cached webpage; or
  3. You can just wait until the search engine crawls the site again and updates its cached webpages. This option can take the longest amount of time to see results since it might be 1-2 months before the site is crawled again.

Google offers an additional tool to have a cached webpage removed by a party who does not own the webpage in question. My understanding is that this process will only work for HTML pages and will not work for PDFs or .doc files):

  1. The webpage must be have been updated since the cached version;
  2. Go to (http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1663691) and click on Google Public URL Removal Tool;
  3. Sign in to Google;
  4. Then it will prompt you for the URL you’d like removed;
  5. Click Continue;
  6. Type a word that appears on the out-of-date cached version of the page but not anywhere on the live version. Its better to use single words and not phrases; and
  7. Click Remove cache.

Given the technical nature of this topic, and fact that I’m not a techie, I’d recommend that you work with a technology professional and not rely on this post. That being said I hope this helps and at least provides you with some general information to get you started.


Bill C-30: What’s it all about? (Video)

March 15, 2012

You’ve probably heard a lot recently about Bill C-30.  It’s technically called the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act but commonly referred to as the “Lawful Access” Bill.   To learn more about this highly controversial law please watch this short video –  click here>>


Spy-cam found in local swimming pool change room: Interviews

March 14, 2012

I was recently interviewed by CTV Rajeev Dhir and CBC Megan Benedictson regarding a pen-shaped ‘spy’ video camera discovered in the staff change room of a Winnipeg public swimming pool. Check out the links above if the story if of interest to you.


Interview with Maritime Morning — Weekend Edition News 95.7 // News 88.9 // News 91.9

March 6, 2012

I recently had an interview with Erin Trassord of Maritime Morning, a local radio station in Halifax, regarding Google’s new Privacy Policy.  To listen, click here


Google’s new privacy policy

March 2, 2012

I recently did an interview with CTV’s Ina Sindhu on questions arising over Google’s new privacy policy.  To watch, click on the link in the CTV news video player heading “CTV’s Ina Sidhu on questions arising over internet privacy due to Google’s policy change“.


What’s at stake with Bill C-30 (lawful access)?

March 1, 2012

I was pleased to join CBC Manitoba’s Marcy Markusa last week for a panel debate about the proposed online surveillance Bill during Information Radio’s morning broadcast.  Click here to listen to the debate (audio clip – 11:29 in length).

More to follow on this important Bill.


Discussing Bill C-30 with CityTV Winnipeg (Video)

March 1, 2012

I recently discussed Bill C-30 (lawful access) with host Jeremy John on CityTV’s Breakfast Television Winnipeg. Click here to watch the discussion about this controversial online surveillance Bill.


Are you a spammer? (Video)

February 28, 2012

You are saying to yourself, “of course not, our organization plays by the rules and only sends electronic messages to people who want to receive them.”  But did you know that there’s new legislation that was passed in Parliament late last year?  Canada’s Anti-Spam Law is expected to come into force soon. Have you prepared for its implementation? To learn more please watch this short video –  click here>>


Toyota advertising case raises privacy issues

November 4, 2011

In 2009, a woman initiated a lawsuit against a Californian advertising firm and Toyota U.S.A. because of an aggressive advertising campaign that she claimed was designed to make individuals believe they were being stalked by a criminal (which, in fact, turned out to be fictitious).  While the charges are now being dealt with by the Los Angeles Superior Court the case raises issues in respect of the application of privacy principles here in Canada.

In 2008, Toyota Matrix advertised the “Your Other You” campaign which targeted young males. It encouraged individuals to provide someone else’s personal information, who would then receive an invitation to a fake personality test.  What really happened was, the “victim” ended up receiving numerous disturbing emails from an imaginary soccer hooligan with a pitbull named Trigger.  This impersonator claimed to be on their way to the victim’s house, who had no idea it was a hoax. In order to promote the advertising campaign, a fake social networking account for the stalker was even set up.

How would a similar case play out here in Canada? Under the PIPEDA framework , there would possibly be a violation of the law because of the alleged collection, use and disclosure of personal information without consent. Further, PIPEDA’s requirement that the “identified purposes” of any collection, use or disclosure of personal information would not likely met. Finally, the reasonableness test, enshrined in PIPEDA, would probably be violated. In short, the facts pertaining to the case could put the relevant parties in the crosshairs of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and courts. As a result, the case should serve as a warning to advertising agencies to ensure that privacy law considerations are thoroughly canvassed with legal counsel before initiating campaigns involving personal information – especially where people are submitting friends’ data.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 77 other followers