Technically Speaking, You’ve Got a Privacy Problem
Thursday, February 9, 2012
9:00 am to 12:20 pm
Program Chairs: Sara Azargive, Cancer Care Ontario Howard Simkevitz, Bell Canada
The Privacy Law session of the OBA Institute always proves to be a well-attended event. In part, this can be attributed to our tradition of putting together an excellent line-up of speakers who address burgeoning issues and provide practical guidance. This year will be no exception.
Lawyers are used to thinking about confidentiality. In many respects, confidentiality is the cornerstone of the legal profession; lawyers regularly handle sensitive information in running their practice and they are accustomed to maintaining the confidentiality of information entrusted to them by their clients. However, lawyers also have related, but separate, requirements regarding the protection of personal information during the course of their various activities. As vanguards of a profession that places a fundamental emphasis on ethics, and given their unique roles when acting on behalf of clients, lawyers must be aware of their responsibilities when they collect, use or disclose personal information.
Alberta is currently the only Canadian jurisdiction with mandatory security breach incident reporting for the private sector. The precise trigger for mandatory reporting remains somewhat unclear to organizations. In an effort to address this uncertainty, AccessPrivacy conducted two workshops this fall, called Exploring the Meaning of the “Real Risk of Significant Harm” breach notification threshold under the Personal Information Protection Act (Alberta).
In September 2011, the Government of Canada re-introduced amendments to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”) in Bill C-12, the Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act (the “Bill”). The Bill implements the government’s response to PIPEDA’s mandated five-year review and is substantially similar to Bill C-28, which was introduced in May 2010 but died with the end of the parliamentary session. Bridget McIlveen provides an overview of the key provisions of the Bill.
Many people are aware that the Global Positioning System (“GPS”) is a satellite based navigation tool that enables individuals to determine their location mostly anywhere on earth. GPS technology provides many benefits, including navigation assistance, transportation support and mapping. Over the last decade, GPS technology has advanced significantly; it is cheaper, more precise and is included in most cars and handheld devices. Due to its size and low-cost, GPS has become a ubiquitous technology.
What some people may not know is that GPS is increasingly being used by U.S. law enforcement agencies to track individuals without a warrant. Oren Weichenberg examines a number of recent cases in the U.S. that have dealt with the issue of warrantless GPS tracking.
Third-year doctoral student Tracy Ann Kosa, of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology, is seeking expertise and experience for her thesis, which proposes a model for measuring privacy.
Eye on Privacy is published by the Privacy Law Section of the Ontario Bar Association. Members are encouraged to submit articles. The articles that appear in this publication represent the opinions of the authors. They do not represent or embody any official position of, or statement by, the OBA except where this may be specifically indicated; nor do they attempt to set forth definitive practice standards or to provide legal advice. Precedents and other material contained herein are intended to be used thoughtfully, as nothing in the work relieves readers of their responsibility to consider it in the light of their own professional skill and judgment.
Login
CBA.org
Français
RSS 
SEARCH
Home
