Slashdot Mirror
Canadian ISP On Disclosing Subscriber Info: Come Back With a Warrant
An anonymous reader writes "Canadian ISP Rogers has updated
its privacy policy to reflect last month's Supreme
Court of Canada Spencer decision. That decision ruled that
there was a reasonable expectation of privacy in subscriber
information. Canada's largest cable ISP will now require a
warrant for law enforcement access to basic subscriber information,
a policy that effectively kills the Canadian government's efforts to
expand the disclosures through voluntary means."
Now we wait and see if Bell and Tellus do the same.
Unfortunate that respecting privacy to the extent the law permits is the exception, not the norm...
Fuck you american corporations
One of the draconian provisions of the upcoming Trans-Pacific Partnership, which the Canadian government unfortunately signed on to (and just hosted a meeting of in Ottawa) is that ISPs are legally expected to monitor and rat out their customers for accessing verboten content, ie torrents.
I hope that this is the beginning of the end for that idea.
-- Insert witty one-liner here. --
When the ISP is forcibly shown who their real customers are, they will tow the line. Nice marketing play, though.
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
The united states stops at the border i'm sick of them expecting us to just do every god damn thing they want us to do, and in return do we get thanks? nope we get mocked constantly by American media as ignorant simple people.
I agree with you 100% and i desperately hope that this stance becomes the standard in our country, no order from a Canadian court then no access to the information of our citizens for your legal trolls
Not that I'm disputing the fact that more than a healthy percentage of torrent downloading is copyrighted content where unauthorized copies (ie, copies for which no explicit permission was ever given to make) are being distributed, but not *ALL* of it is... so who does the ISP "rat out" their customers to?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Re "I hope that this is the beginning of the end for that idea." :)
Canada seems to want the self signed bureaucratic option. Officials will go looking, get isp logs, users full details and then seek a real court for the later stages of an investigation.
ie customer information, no reasonable expectation of privacy, no warrant is required for warrantless "looking" at internet activity
How this new court event will slow down that vision of finding and ip, logging usage and review will be interesting.
Long term law changes could allow cleared local town, city officials and police in say Australia, Canada or the UK a form of automated interfaces into all their nations isp logs and web 2.0 sites.
Within new laws they could find a user via an ip, log usage, review the past many months and track all new activity of that users account.
Just "looking" at months of web history and your full account details.
Australia had news on issues like this "Greens unveil plan to require warrant to access phone and internet records"
http://www.theguardian.com/wor... (11 June 2013)
"2007 to the Telecommunications Interception Act clarified that so-called “metadata” – email addresses, information about where emails are sent and from whom they are received and who is called from a certain telephone number, from which location and for how long – can be accessed simply by filling in forms"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Including those residing in countries with International Data Treaties with Canada.
Yes, that means the USA and the EU.
Privacy. It's what's for Breakfast, Lunch, and Supper.
Would you like some Poutine with that back bacon, American Privacy Ignorers?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The TPP can not sell Canadian Citizens Constitutional Right to privacy.
It's not a bill.
It's in the Constitution.
In writing.
No government can sell that right to another country.
PERIOD.
(yes, I did take Canadian Law in grade 10, it was the best thing I ever did, other than Canadian Business Law later on, and, yes, my brother passed the BC bar and got his LLD from UBC)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The big difference between Australia and the UK compared to Canada is that Canada's constitution includes a bill of rights and the Supreme Court isn't shy about striking down laws as unconstitutional and the same with lesser courts including throwing out ill gotten evidence so here it's actually the courts requiring warrants and the government can't (actually this one will) just pass unconstitutional laws without ramifications.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Exactly how difficult, on a scale of say one to ten, do you think it will be for the Canadian cops to get warrants?
The problem is the lack of warrants over some time is what induced this law reform. Also recall the political pressure to allow new colour of law warrantless logging and isp account tracking.
ie rolled back in under the cover of 10's of pages related to cyber bullying laws with legal protections for isp providing support and tacking in a lower “reasonable suspicion” standard.
'Say no to government spying" (March 31, 2014)
http://fullcomment.nationalpos...
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
So the government can't pass a law cancelling the precedent or case law? I think that has happened in my country a few times.
The courts have already struck down provisions in law regarding both "reasonable suspicion" and "exigent circumstances." Slapping it back into the law, will ensure it ends right back up at the SCC and struck down again.
Om, nomnomnom...
I love to hear it when places actually stand up for due process.
I have to applaud Rogers for doing the right thing.
This may even be a first for them, seeing as they are one of the most evil corporations ever created.
If I'm not mistaken, Voltage is still suing (re: subscriber info) Teksavvy for its customers pirating Hurt Locker or some shit...
Buck Feta. You know what to do.
Thats one things we got one our side. The courts most of the time will side with the citizen when it come to Charter of Rights, for now they have our backs. Now is even a better time since Harper has been pissing them off and even the Con judges are going agaist the party line.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Slapping it back into the law, will ensure it ends right back up at the SCC and struck down again.
Until there are laws that charge politicians with treason every time they knowingly do this, they will continue to follow the following formula,
1. pass some laws to appease corporate lobby or some police state loving people
2. laws are used
3. eventually, someone challenges said laws
4. eventually, the courts tell the government FU, the law is unconstitutional and is struck down
5. go to step #1
Just because laws are unconstitutional does not mean they are not enacted anyway. Before they are struck down, they are used to fuck up the lives of people that are impacted by these laws, be these good guys or bad guys (many times laws are passed to easier take out bad guys).
Take the Quebec's laws on protests.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2...
So, many politicians don't view constitution as something blocking them, just slightly impeding their efforts. Remember, they are lawyers *and* constitutionality of laws they pass don't have much consequence on their paycheck or their future.
Until there are laws that charge politicians with treason every time they knowingly do this, they will continue to follow the following formula,
There *is* a law on treason, this isn't treason going by your narrow view of it. Rather, this is what you want people to be charged with when they pass laws that disagree with you. In turn, governments have it in their interest to pass laws that in general benefit society. Quebecs protest laws are an example of this, especially after the spate of individuals masking their identities and engaging in vandalism, and attempting to riot for the sake of rioting. The courts on the other hand have the right to counter this, when there is a grievance by citizens against the government which is what's happening in this case.
Remember S1 of the charter in Canada? And remember that Quebec didn't sign the charter. Right, now remember that in Quebec they don't use common law. Put those three things together and what do we have?
Om, nomnomnom...
In turn, governments have it in their interest to pass laws that in general benefit society.
If you consider the very wealthy and corporations to be society then what you write is true for most governments. But if you consider the majority of the electorate being society, then not so. For an example of what I mean look at the recent study from Princeton University and Northwestern University that reached the conclusion that the USA is an oligarchy.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.
Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-...
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
If you consider the very wealthy and corporations to be society then what you write is true for most governments. But if you consider the majority of the electorate being society, then not so. For an example of what I mean look at the recent study from Princeton University and Northwestern University that reached the conclusion that the USA is an oligarchy.
Sorry, did I miss something when Canada became the US; or are you just happier posting something that doesn't apply to every country.
Then again, a study out of two heavily left wing universities saying the US is an oligarchy has about as much weight as the taliban saying Europe is a christian fundamentalist state, and Japan is ruled by hindu's.
Om, nomnomnom...
Nope you did (fortunately) not miss something about Canada becoming a part of the US. The study I referenced while concerning the US is pointing out quite a few points that are applicable to many other countries too, for example all of those are involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership a group that Canada is a part of.
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
But of course we will SELL your information to our corporate partners, and will most certainly use it to bilk you for every dollar you have. But we won't hand it over to the police, don't worry.
The deenition of news is "Mad bites dog." If common sense becomes the news, you know that things are messed up.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Apparently I did. Otherwise Asia became the US going by your logic as well. And i we did become a part of the US, can you tell me where the cheap electronics are, and when I can find the prices for 1/4 to 1/2 of that compared up here in Canada.
Om, nomnomnom...