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:
- 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;
- You can seek a court order or other legal document to have certain content removed from the website/cached webpage; or
- 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):
- The webpage must be have been updated since the cached version;
- Go to (http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1663691) and click on Google Public URL Removal Tool;
- Sign in to Google;
- Then it will prompt you for the URL you’d like removed;
- Click Continue;
- 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
- 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.
Leave a Comment » |
Defamation, Intellectual Property, Internet, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Social Networking Websites | Tagged: Corporate Information, Google, Internet, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Social Networking |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
December 20, 2010
Recent news coverage about WikiLeaks has focused on the leaked documents and ethics, or lack thereof, of WikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange. Rightfully so.
The formerly classified documents are tantalizing and the story behind Assange and his WikiLeaks website is fascinating. But amidst the media chatter about the damage inflicted by WikiLeaks itself, the circumstances surrounding the initial release of secret documents from the U.S. government to WikiLeaks should provide a wake up call for other governments and corporations here at home.
Read more>>
Leave a Comment » |
Access to Information, Data Protection, Employee Monitoring, Safeguarding, Safekeeping, Security, Security Breach, Technology | Tagged: Access to Information, Corporate Information, Information Technology, Safeguarding, Security, Workplace Surveillance |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
November 29, 2010
Managing access to information requests by public sector organizations has never been more challenging than it is today. Complex public-private sector business arrangements, growing expectations for access by the public and increasing volumes of electronic records are all making it difficult to navigate access to information laws in the context of the real world. As a result, I thought that a one hour complimentary webinar would help! I hope you can attend.
What topics will be covered?
- Overview of access to information 101: the basics
- The 3 vantage points: public bodies, applicants & third parties
- Review of recent cases/headlines
- Identifying key legal and PR landmines
- Discussion of trends in access to information
- Practical tips for managing requests in a cost-effective manner
Who should attend?
Public bodies who are subject to access to information laws, private-sector organizations who regularly deal with public bodies and individuals/organizations who routinely initiate access to information requests under public sector access to information laws.
When is the webinar?
Wednesday, January 26th, 2011 from 1 – 2 PM (CST)
Please register <here> (space is limited)
Leave a Comment » |
Access to Information, Ombudsman, Webinar | Tagged: Access to Information, Corporate Information, Manitoba, Manitoba Ombudsman |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
October 20, 2010
Does your office have a copy machine? If so, then this post is worth reading. CBC news has just released the results of an investigation that exposes the security risks associated with modern copy machines, specifically, the ease at which information scanned into certain copiers can be tapped. Just think about the information that gets scanned into your office copier. Personal information. Confidential corporate information such as client data. Even intellectual property. It’s a scary thought if you haven’t done your due diligence, especially considering that privacy laws can apply to certain data undoubtedly scanned into your copy machine. Check out CBC’s online story here or TV segment here. And if you’d like to learn more, you may also want to read my post from earlier this year which provided a link to a similar CBS news story.
Leave a Comment » |
Data Encryption, Data Protection, Identity Theft, Privacy, Privacy Breach, Safeguarding, Safekeeping, Security, Technology | Tagged: Corporate Information, Identity Theft, Information Technology, Privacy Breach, Privacy Compliance, Safeguarding, Security |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
March 18, 2010
In what should serve as a valuable reminder of the need to educate employees about what constitutes acceptable postings on social networking websites, BBC is reporting that “the Israeli military cancelled a planned raid on a Palestinian village after one of its soldiers posted details of the operation on Facebook. The unnamed soldier revealed the time and place of the raid and the name of his unit on the social networking site.”
I’ve previously commented on social networking websites and employer-employee relationships. This BBC report is just one more example of a situation which may have been prevented with better employee training and a clear social networking policy. Common sense should, and typically does, guide employees in determining what to post online. Yet, if an Israeli soldier can’t think twice before posting the details of a planned operation it’s easy to see how some employees of Canadian businesses – perhaps yours - unintentionally post valuable corporate information online.
Leave a Comment » |
Facebook, Internet, MySpace, Online Reputation Management, Social Networking Websites | Tagged: Corporate Information, Employees, Facebook, Online Reputation Management, Social Networking |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
November 28, 2009
According to a Cyber-Ark survey entitled “The Global Recession and its effect on Work Ethics” (link below), 58% of U.S. employees surveyed said that if they thought their job was at risk they would, as a pre-emptive move, be prepared to download company/competitive data. Fifty two per cent (52%) said that if they were fired tomorrow they’d take their employer’s customer and contacts data.
More disturbingly, 51% said it’s “easy” to take sensitive information out of their company and, as reported by Out-Law.com, 85% were aware that it’s illegal to download corporate information. The favoured medium for stealing corporate information is a USB memory stick followed by e-mail.
As I’ve mentioned in previous posts rogue employees pose a risk to privacy compliance and, as a result, corporate information requires safekeeping. In today’s economy, information is the most valuable corporate asset. For this reason, businesses of all sizes should take proactive steps to protect corporate data. Whether it’s customer or supplier lists, intellectual property or employee personal information, it’s information that needs safekeeping, especially when we see statistics like those reported above.
The Global Recession and its effect on Work Ethics
Leave a Comment » |
Data Protection, Due Diligence, Mobile devices, Privacy, Safeguarding, Safekeeping | Tagged: Corporate Information, Due Diligence, Employees, Privacy Compliance, Safeguarding, Security |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
November 18, 2009
The U.K.’s Huffington Post is reporting that a rogue employee of a major mobile phone company has illegally sold millions of customer records to rival companies. Apparently, customers’ personal information (including contract expiry dates) was sold to several rivals, which then used the material to cold-call customers to offer them an alternative deal.
As I’ve previously written, information really is the most valuable corporate asset. And for this reason, businesses of all sizes should take steps to protect corporate information regardless of whether it is stored online or off-line. Whether it’s customer or supplier lists, intellectual property or employees’ personal information, it’s information that needs safekeeping.
This case should serve as a reminder that corporate safekeeping practices must include protecting data from rogue employees.
3 Comments |
Data Protection, Due Diligence, Personal Information, PIPA, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Breach, Safeguarding, Safekeeping, Security | Tagged: Businesses, Corporate Information, Due Diligence, Employees, Personal Information, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Breach, Privacy Compliance, Safeguarding, Security |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
July 27, 2009

Have you heard the term “cloud computing“, but aren’t really clear what it means?
Cloud computing is an umbrella term that refers to the use of Internet-hosted computer services. Think of your server — instead of having one in-house server located on company premises, an organization might opt to buy space on a third-party provider’s server. Other options include software hosting and data storage. By purchasing computing services from a variety of Internet-based providers, your computer needs are housed within a larger “cloud” of computer services.
Some organizations are opting for ”Software as a service” (SaaS), and allowing their data to reside on other company’s servers, or “the cloud“. Users only have to buy the space they need, which allows organizations to save money on their technology costs. Other benefits include access to people with technological know-how, flexibility and reduced maintenance costs.
Cloud computing is not new, but is now embedded into the fabric of modern business operations. In fact, the Los Angeles Times has reported that the city of Los Angeles is considering using Google applications for all of its software needs.
Privacy issues related to cloud computing, however, are profound. For example, many of the security questions that relate to traditional third-party data hosting were raised when a hacker broke into a Twitter employee’s work e-mail account and stole confidential company documents. The World Privacy Forum, meanwhile, has released a 28-page report on some of the privacy issues that relate to cloud computing. The report concludes that sharing information may expose some business users to liability, and emphasizes the importance of checking a cloud provider’s terms of service, privacy policy, and location.
Canadian businesses that engage in cloud computing should be reminded that they must do so in compliance with applicable privacy laws. For example, the Personal Information and Protection of Electronic Documents Act obliges organizations that transfer personal information to third parties to ensure appropriate security safeguards are in place.
They should also be mindful of the raging debate about the perils of cloud computing that has been underway now for some time. While cloud computing has the potential to provide benefits, organizations should ask themselves whether it is worth the risks it poses. You might save money in the short run, but is it worth the potential of a massive privacy breach?
2 Comments |
Internet, PIPEDA, Privacy, Technology | Tagged: Businesses, Corporate Information, Information Technology, Internet, Outsourcing, Personal Information, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Compliance, Technology |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman
May 29, 2009

It’s been a thrilling week for my colleagues at Pitblado LLP as it was announced earlier this week that we were to be the 1st Canadian law firm to be a guest blogger on the must-read slaw.ca. Yours truly, three of my colleagues from our firm’s Information & Ideas Practice Group as well as our firm’s librarian each contributed one post a day this week to slaw.ca on cutting edge legal topics. Here’s what we covered…
On Monday, I posted “What Would Happen If One of your Employees Posted a Video of an Irate Customer on YouTube?”, which I cross posted on my blog earlier this week. The post highlights a YouTube video of an irrate customer as a reminder to Canadian businesses of the powers of new technologies such as YouTube and the corresponding need to protect against the dissemination of this type of video through employee privacy training and the adoption and enforcement of privacy and procedures.
On Tuesday, Carol Lynn Schafer posted “Do TOS Have the Final Word on our Fundamental Rights and Freedoms?”, which discusses the controversial effects of Terms of Service on popular websites such as Facebook and Twitter. As Carol Lynn notes, Terms of Service should be drafted with the bigger picture in mind and can no longer be seen as standard agreements that can be treated with a one size fits all approach.
On Wednesday, Jolin Spencer posted “Whose Property Is It, Anyway?”, which discusses the questions that come into play when employees leave their positions. For example, what can an employee take, and what must they leave, when they vacate their position? As Jolin points out, no business wants its intellectual property assets walking out the door with a former employee.
On Thursday, our firm’s librarian, Karen Sawatsky, posted “Legal Research Bootcamp – Winnipeg Style”, which discusses her experience collaborating with members of the Manitoba Bar Association and the Law Society of Manitoba to create a CLE for articling students on legal research. The Legal Research Bootcamp is a first for Manitoba students, and aims to bridge the gap between when students start their articles and when CPLED begins in the fall.
And last but not least, today Adam Herstein posted “Manitoba: Innovative Fighter of Child Sexual Exploitation”, which focuses on Manitoba’s recent enactment of The Child and Family Services Amendment Act (Child Pornography Reporting) (Manitoba) and how Manitoba is the first province in Canada to enact legislation that makes it mandatory for a person who encounters child pornography to report it to authorities. Adam also notes that Canada has a national tipline called Cybertip.ca for reporting the sexual exploitation of children.
Thanks to slaw.ca for the opportunity to contribute!
1 Comment |
Blogs, Copyright, Facebook, Government, Intellectual Property, PIPEDA, Privacy, Social Networking Websites, Technology, Training | Tagged: Businesses, Copyright, Corporate Information, Employees, Facebook, Information Technology, Intellectual Property, Internet, Inventions, Manitoba, Mobile devices, Personal Information, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Breach, Privacy Compliance, Safeguarding, Social Networking, Technology |
Permalink
Posted by Brian Bowman