Michael Power writes: If you’re someone caught up in a data breach or a person who can point to an actual violation of privacy, an obvious question is whether you suffered harm and should you be compensated? Three PIPEDA-related decisions from Canadian courts in 2010 offer a glimpse of different approaches to the subject of…
Category: Court
Michigan court ruling on privacy may hurt public’s right to know
Ron Dzwonkowski reports: In one of the last acts of its short-lived Democratic majority, the Michigan Supreme Court did some potential damage to the public’s right to know, in a ruling about the privacy of what public employees do on public time with publicly provided communications systems. The court ought to reconsider this decision before…
UK: MP backs controversial approach of asking everyone to provide DNA sample in high-profile murder case
A MP has backed calls for the DNA screening of all men in Bristol as part of the hunt for the murderer of Jo Yeates. Miss Yeates’ body was found at the roadside on Christmas Day eight days after she was reported missing. Bristol East Labour MP Kerry McCarthy said if police thought the exercise…
Confusion, FUD, or fundraising on the 2703(d) trail?
How many Twitter followers does it take to make sense of a court order? As noted yesterday, Twitter received a court order under Title 18 § 2703, the Stored Communications Act, to provide information on the accounts of some people associated with WikiLeaks. Rather than just comply with the 2703(d) order, which Twitter certainly had the option…