The Canadian Privacy Law Blog: Developments in privacy law and writings of a Canadian privacy lawyer, containing information related to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (aka PIPEDA) and other Canadian and international laws.
Recent Posts
- Incident: Backup tapes containing sensitive health...
- Alberta Privacy Commissioner faults two companies ...
- Incident: Car thief drives away with personal data...
- How much do security breaches cost?
- Feds seek authority to tap airborne broadband
- 184 Japanese financial institutions lose customer ...
- Federal/provincial/territorial consultation on ID ...
- Spy in the bank
- Everything you never wanted to know about the UK I...
- Drugs drive identity theft crimes
On Twitter
About this page and the author
The author of this blog,
David T.S. Fraser, is a Canadian privacy lawyer who practices with the
firm of McInnes Cooper. He is the author of the Physicians' Privacy Manual. He has a national and international practice advising corporations and individuals on matters related to Canadian privacy laws.
For full contact information and a brief bio, please see David's profile.
Please note that I am only able to provide legal advice to clients. I am not able to provide free legal advice. Any unsolicited information sent to David Fraser cannot be considered to be solicitor-client privileged.
Privacy Calendar
Archives
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- February 2009
- March 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- August 2009
- September 2009
- October 2009
- November 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- March 2010
- April 2010
Links
Blogs I Follow
Small Print
The views expressed herein are solely the author's and should not be attributed to his employer or clients. Any postings on legal issues are provided as a public service, and do not constitute solicitation or provision of legal advice. The author makes no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained herein or linked to. Nothing herein should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent counsel.
This web site is presented for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and do not create a solicitor-client relationship between you and David T.S. Fraser. If you are seeking specific advice related to Canadian privacy law or PIPEDA, contact the author, David T.S. Fraser.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
The Potter Injunction - It Could Have Been Worse
If you are a regular reader of Michael Geist's blog or any other form of media known to humanity, you have heard about the injunction obtained by Raincoast Books about the accidental sale of a few copies of the latest Harry Potter novel. Some, including Michael, have been very critical of the order obtained by the Canadian publisher. While I won't comment on that, Michael's posted a summary of what the publisher was asking for, but didn't get. The judge declined to order that anyone who got their hands on the book should hand over information about anyone who may have been privy to any discussion of the embargoed book:
Michael Geist - The Potter Injunction - It Could Have Been Worse"...There are two things to take from this additional level of detail. First, Raincoast Books sought an order that not only would curtail basic freedoms but it also targeted individual privacy by literally seeking legal authority to compel disclosure about anyone who may have learned of the contents of the book. Second, the judge that issued this order did indeed consider the consequences of the order and amazingly felt that it was appropriate to limit the freedom to read, freedom of speech, and the freedom of personal property."
Labels: information breaches
The Canadian Privacy Law Blog is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.
