Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canadian ISP On Disclosing Subscriber Info: Come Back With a Warrant

Posted by samzenpus on from the take-off dept.

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."

7 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. Good for them by by+(1706743) · · Score: 3, Informative

    Unfortunate that respecting privacy to the extent the law permits is the exception, not the norm...

    1. Re:Good for them by roc97007 · · Score: 2

      Unfortunate that respecting privacy to the extent the law permits is the exception, not the norm...

      Yes. Sadly, that's why it's news. Were it the norm, it would not be news...

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  2. YAY US by maliqua · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fuck you american corporations

  3. This is excellent timing given the upcoming T.P.P. by MrKevvy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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. --
  4. Re:It won't last. by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 3, Informative

    Darn it! Toe the line. Toe the line. HOLD THE LINE!!!!!!!

    Me do speak English.

    --
    Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
  5. Re:This is excellent timing given the upcoming T.P by dryeo · · Score: 2

    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
  6. Re:This is excellent timing given the upcoming T.P by Mashiki · · Score: 2

    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...