Here's a piece that really describes the current state of play as it relates to the Canadian privacy vs. access debate. This has direct relevance to the policy considerations of the GNSO Council on Whois. -------------------- Guarding our privacy on the Internet -------------------- The Windsor Star It took some criticism in the press, but the federal Conservatives have thankfully agreed to open up what were closed consultations on Internet privacy legislation and have articulated their commitment to protecting the privacy rights of Canadians. A controversy erupted last week when it was revealed the Public Safety and Industry departments had been conducting limited consultations on legislative changes that would make it easier for police to get customers' personal information from Internet providers without a judicially authorized warrant. Civil liberties organizations were not invited to participate in those consultations and the process was not advertised by the government. Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day distanced himself from the kerfuffle, saying the consultation document had been distributed without his knowledge or consent and that public input from all quarters was welcome. The consultation process, which was set to end Sept. 25, is now an open process and the deadline for comment has been extended to Oct. 12, so that privacy advocates and civil liberties organizations can weigh in. It was the former Liberal government that introduced legislation -- called the "lawful access law" -- that would have forced Internet service providers to turn over personal information to police without a warrant, but the bill died on the order paper. The legislation was decried by privacy advocates at the time and condemned by Canada's privacy commissioner, Jennifer Stoddart, who feared it would transform the private sector into an investigative arm of the state. "It's a basic tenet of our democracy that the citizen cannot be constrained by the state except in certain circumstances," said Stoddart. "That's why we have judges, that's why we have search warrants." Day appears to have heard the critics because he insisted Thursday his government will not allow police to obtain personal information from private businesses without a warrant. "We have not and we will not be proposing legislation to grant police the power to get information from Internet companies without a warrant. That's never been a proposal," said Day. "It may make some investigations more difficult, but our expectation is rights to our privacy are such that we do not plan, nor will we have in place, something that would allow police to get that information." Such a clear statement is welcome because Ottawa will likely face increasing pressure from Canada's police agencies to reverse that stance. Just one day after Day issued that unambiguous statement, Canada's police chiefs took him to task. Clayton Pecknold, co-chair of the law amendments committee of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, said the information that would be sought from police without a warrant would hardly qualify as personal. He said police don't want the power to track an individual's online movements or email history, but the power, for example, to link an IP address to a name and an address and phone number. "The type of information that we're asking for is not the type of highly personal information for which the court says you need a warrant," said Pecknold. "It's not unreasonable for us to be able to ask Internet service providers or the telephone company to provide us the customer name and address." While it might not seem unreasonable, such questions represent the tip of a very slippery slope that could lead to police gaining access to an individual's Internet history and personal emails. Search warrants help ensure police do not launch fishing expeditions, but can still conduct thorough investigations. They strike a balance between privacy rights and the protection of the public and that balance must be kept. (Source: <http://tinyurl.com/38a9hf>) -------------------- -- Peter Hope-Tindall peter@hope-tindall.org <- New Email Address +1 416 321-2030 Phone/Fax +1 416 417-2700 Cell -- Regards, Ross Rader Director, Retail Services Tucows Inc. http://www.domaindirect.com t. 416.538.5492