Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Government Seeking New Net Snooping Powers
An anonymous reader writes "A bill being considered by the Canadian federal parliament includes two clauses specifically to reduce the 'due process' imposed when the police need information from ISPs. Under the proposed bill, law enforcement officers will not require a warrant to acquire information about internet subscribers from Canadian ISPs ... Paul Ducklin has criticized the bill saying that it 'doesn't even seem to propose that the requests be based on any sort of specific identifier, such as a name or an email address ... This suggests, in the worst case, that an ISP might be compelled simply to hand over information about all subscribers. No warrant needed, and thus no proactive oversight by the judiciary.'"
You pulled a bill from a year ago, that has been effectively tabled by the fact that we just had an election? And where no current bill of the same authority is under consideration?
There is no bill, hence no discussion anymore, hence NO FUCKING STORY. Way to factcheck.
Yeah that is pretty lame.
Still, it is definitely a problem that anyone holding any public office would even think of doing this.
The legal definition of "treason" needs to be expanded to include "any elected official, appointed official, or employee or agent of either, who makes any effort to subvert, reduce, eliminate, or work around due process for any reason or no reason at all". For both the US and Canada. It's hard to think of more effective ways to permanently damage a nation.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Really?
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2011/08/09/pol-internet-privacy.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/pm-vows-to-rush-comprehensive-slate-of-crime-bills-into-law/article2046544/
These links are a tad newer than the election
When our country is being compared to China in copyright issues that is just bad. Too many cheap people out their stealing.
You must be trolling, or you decided that complete ignorance about a subject shouldn't stop you from taking a position concerning it.
This bill is for law enforcement officers to obtain ISP information with less due process. Copyright infringement is generally not a crime. Therefore, it generally wouldn't involve police.
Instead, the vast majority of copyright infringement cases would involve discovery/subpoenas issued during a civil suit. That implies authorization by a court for such information to be obtained.
Even if you had a point, and you don't, I'd rather see every last copyright cartel go out of business and sell its assets at auction. In the scheme of things, that would be a far lesser loss compared to liberty and privacy.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Actually, from requests I've had (I work from a small ISP), they already have something on the books for this and it doesn't require a warrant. The RCMP officer refered to section 7(3)(c.1)(ii) of the "Pursuant to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Document Act" (PIPEDA). Apparently it requires no warrant in cases where disclosure is required to enforce a law... That leaves an aftertaste of gigantic loophole in my mouth but I'm no lawyer.
Mind the frickin' laser...
You seem to be suggesting that there is some sort of double standard. So tell me, when was the last time that you heard of Google sending their armed law enforcement agents to a private residence to arrest someone? We hold corporations and governments to different standards because they have different powers and different duties. Part of the duties of a government are to protect the rights of citizens and individuals (often from corporations). This sort of legislation betrays the trust that we are supposed to be able to have for our government.