Two executives meet at a function and exchange business cards. This makes the information public and allows it to be exchanged freely without worrying about contravening any privacy laws. Right?
Not so, says the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who has ruled that a business e-mail address is personal information protected under the federal privacy legislation in a landmark decision involving spam last December.
"The case surrounded whether business e-mail is personal information and the commissioner found that it did not fall within the exemption - many people call it the business card exemption," said Ottawa lawyer Dan Palayew, who specializes in labour, employment and privacy law at Ogilvy Renault.
"The intent of the decision is to protect individuals from spam at work that is not work-related. While many commentators have expressed shock at this, when you look at it in the context of the problem that spam has become and the broad purpose to protect personal information that this legislation covers, then it's not that unusual."
The case involved the Ottawa Renegades football team and University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, one of Canada's leading e-commerce and privacy law experts.
The Renegades sent an unsolicited commercial e-mail to Mr. Geist's university e-mail address hoping the professor would be interested in buying season tickets. The football team's sales and marketing staff had gathered the e-mail addresses of university employees from a public online directory.
While he asked the football club to remove his e-mail address from its marketing list, the same message arrived a few days later in his other office e-mail inbox at Ottawa law firm Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt.
Mr. Geist filed a complaint with the federal Privacy Commissioner alleging that the Ottawa Renegades had collected his personal information and used it without his consent. The commissioner agreed.
"I think the decision sends a clear signal to the business and privacy communities that our national privacy law does apply to unsolicited commercial e-mail," said Mr. Geist, who is a Canada Research Chair in Internet and e-commerce law.
"However, it also highlights some of the law's limitations, since an expensive and lengthy application to the federal court is needed in order to levy a penalty. Moreover, the deterrent value of the decision is limited by the privacy commissioner's policy of keeping the identity of targets of complaints such as the Renegades secret."
The opinion was not a legal ruling, but could have been taken to Federal Court within 45 days. Mr. Geist did not pursue further action.
Under the Personal Information Protection and Electronics Document Act (PIPEDA), essentially all the information on a business card -- title, name, and business address and telephone number -- is not considered to be personal or protected under the legislation, which came into effect Jan. 1, 2004.
Because e-mail addresses are not specifically mentioned in the Act, Assistant Privacy Commissioner Heather Black pointed out in her ruling that an e-mail address, whether publicly available, is not covered by the PIPEDA exemption.
The ruling said that the football team erred because the use of Mr. Geist's e-mail address was not directly related to the reason the information had been made public on either Web site.
"You are allowed to collect and use publicly available information, but the use has to be directly related to the purpose for which the information appears in a directory or notice," Mr. Palayew explained.
"The expectation is that any contact would have the intention of furthering the organization's interests."
For example, it could be argued that a law book publisher would have a good case for contacting a university law professor about a new publication or a pharmaceutical company might be able to e-mail doctors about a newly developed drug.
Nevertheless, the ruling may also raised a number of other questions, such as whether a businessperson's fax details are protected personal information because it is not a standard tel
Slashdot Mirror
Two executives meet at a function and exchange business cards. This makes the information public and allows it to be exchanged freely without worrying about contravening any privacy laws. Right? Not so, says the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who has ruled that a business e-mail address is personal information protected under the federal privacy legislation in a landmark decision involving spam last December. "The case surrounded whether business e-mail is personal information and the commissioner found that it did not fall within the exemption - many people call it the business card exemption," said Ottawa lawyer Dan Palayew, who specializes in labour, employment and privacy law at Ogilvy Renault. "The intent of the decision is to protect individuals from spam at work that is not work-related. While many commentators have expressed shock at this, when you look at it in the context of the problem that spam has become and the broad purpose to protect personal information that this legislation covers, then it's not that unusual." The case involved the Ottawa Renegades football team and University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, one of Canada's leading e-commerce and privacy law experts. The Renegades sent an unsolicited commercial e-mail to Mr. Geist's university e-mail address hoping the professor would be interested in buying season tickets. The football team's sales and marketing staff had gathered the e-mail addresses of university employees from a public online directory. While he asked the football club to remove his e-mail address from its marketing list, the same message arrived a few days later in his other office e-mail inbox at Ottawa law firm Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt. Mr. Geist filed a complaint with the federal Privacy Commissioner alleging that the Ottawa Renegades had collected his personal information and used it without his consent. The commissioner agreed. "I think the decision sends a clear signal to the business and privacy communities that our national privacy law does apply to unsolicited commercial e-mail," said Mr. Geist, who is a Canada Research Chair in Internet and e-commerce law. "However, it also highlights some of the law's limitations, since an expensive and lengthy application to the federal court is needed in order to levy a penalty. Moreover, the deterrent value of the decision is limited by the privacy commissioner's policy of keeping the identity of targets of complaints such as the Renegades secret." The opinion was not a legal ruling, but could have been taken to Federal Court within 45 days. Mr. Geist did not pursue further action. Under the Personal Information Protection and Electronics Document Act (PIPEDA), essentially all the information on a business card -- title, name, and business address and telephone number -- is not considered to be personal or protected under the legislation, which came into effect Jan. 1, 2004. Because e-mail addresses are not specifically mentioned in the Act, Assistant Privacy Commissioner Heather Black pointed out in her ruling that an e-mail address, whether publicly available, is not covered by the PIPEDA exemption. The ruling said that the football team erred because the use of Mr. Geist's e-mail address was not directly related to the reason the information had been made public on either Web site. "You are allowed to collect and use publicly available information, but the use has to be directly related to the purpose for which the information appears in a directory or notice," Mr. Palayew explained. "The expectation is that any contact would have the intention of furthering the organization's interests." For example, it could be argued that a law book publisher would have a good case for contacting a university law professor about a new publication or a pharmaceutical company might be able to e-mail doctors about a newly developed drug. Nevertheless, the ruling may also raised a number of other questions, such as whether a businessperson's fax details are protected personal information because it is not a standard tel
only old people program in cobol come one, you knew it was coming
someone has already bought slashdot.org
they've final got around to starting
The problem is that I won't have any money to retire with
Tsars abuse power, then got shot when people have had enough of it.
If we don't stop the dolphins now we'll be overrun with evil cyborg dolphins
You could flavour it with garlic
Or most industries?
google reports 7,999,999,980 pages cashed and unaccesible from china
I would have thought you'd need more than 1 nuclear sub to kill all the blind people
I thought Psychology theories only last 25 years tops... so yes that is longer than IT knowledge
Has anyone consided if we are damaging society by persecuting those who post AC?
.. if billie is going to be in it? In soviet russia, pop stars save you! oh wait
There's no justice quite like angry mob justice
very few wives have MRI scanners