Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Canada Privacy Your Rights Online

Canadian ISP On Disclosing Subscriber Info: Come Back With a Warrant 55

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

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

Comments Filter:
  • Good for them (Score:4, Informative)

    by by (1706743) ( 1706744 ) on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @07:10PM (#47471247)
    Unfortunate that respecting privacy to the extent the law permits is the exception, not the norm...
    • 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...

      • If the company publicly states that the data is private and only disclosed via warrant then that court ruling applies. If the ISP declares the data accessible to the police at will, then the client loses their expectation of privacy and the court ruling doesn't apply.
    • This is what they say, now let's see what they do! I truly hope they are true to their words, including behind the scenes where we don't normally see.
    • Err... not to the extent the law permits... to the minimum the law requires

      But the two are related closely. In the US, metadata is considered the corporations, which obviously has no privacy right to the data. The idea is that the person has already disclosed that data. Hence, the government has a much lower, well non-existent, burden on law enforcement because they are asking for business records, not for personal information.

      In Canada, it seems that just got inverted, so now it's private information v

      • by dryeo ( 100693 )

        The Canadian courts think that our right against unreasonable search is actually a right to privacy and it's not just the government that has to respect that right, businesses have to respect rights as well.
        Another example is that the courts have ruled that companies can't do drug tests for no reason whereas down the States it seems to be standard procedure even if (off-work) drug use has no bearing on the job.

      • by skywire ( 469351 )

        Perhaps you should read what you are replying to before replying.

  • YAY US (Score:4, Insightful)

    by maliqua ( 1316471 ) on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @07:18PM (#47471299)

    Fuck you american corporations

    • I'll bet the Canadians who rendered this binding opinion

      did so in a completely gentlemanly manner...

      with profound politeness and thoughtful adjectives.

      • Dearest representatives of the corporate interests of the United States of America:

        It behooves me to request that, as we collectively drop the rears of our trousers, would you kindly bend down and kiss our asses? Only if you please, eh?

        With tender, gentlemanly affection,

        Your friendly neighbour,


  • by MrKevvy ( 85565 ) on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @07:23PM (#47471321)

    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.

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )

      ISPs are legally expected to monitor and rat out their customers for accessing verboten content, ie torrents.

      Not that I'm disputing the fact that more than a healthy percentage of torrent downloading is copyrighted content where unauthorized copies (ie, copies for which no explicit permission was ever given to make) are being distributed, but not *ALL* of it is... so who does the ISP "rat out" their customers to?

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Re "I hope that this is the beginning of the end for that idea."
      Canada seems to want the self signed bureaucratic option. Officials will go looking, get isp logs, users full details and then seek a real court for the later stages of an investigation.
      ie customer information, no reasonable expectation of privacy, no warrant is required for warrantless "looking" at internet activity :)
      How this new court event will slow down that vision of finding and ip, logging usage and review will be interesting.
      • by dryeo ( 100693 )

        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.

        • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          The problem is the lack of warrants over some time is what induced this law reform. Also recall the political pressure to allow new colour of law warrantless logging and isp account tracking.
          ie rolled back in under the cover of 10's of pages related to cyber bullying laws with legal protections for isp providing support and tacking in a lower “reasonable suspicion” standard.
          'Say no to government spying" (March 31, 2014)
          http://fullcomment.nationalpos... []
          • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

            The courts have already struck down provisions in law regarding both "reasonable suspicion" and "exigent circumstances." Slapping it back into the law, will ensure it ends right back up at the SCC and struck down again.

        • Thats one things we got one our side. The courts most of the time will side with the citizen when it come to Charter of Rights, for now they have our backs. Now is even a better time since Harper has been pissing them off and even the Con judges are going agaist the party line.

          • by dryeo ( 100693 )

            Luckily Harper has been having a hard time even finding qualified judges as extreme as his government.

    • The TPP can not sell Canadian Citizens Constitutional Right to privacy.

      It's not a bill.

      It's in the Constitution.

      In writing.

      No government can sell that right to another country.


      (yes, I did take Canadian Law in grade 10, it was the best thing I ever did, other than Canadian Business Law later on, and, yes, my brother passed the BC bar and got his LLD from UBC)

      • by sedmonds ( 94908 )
        Privacy isn't written into the Constitution. It's been read into the Constitution by the Supreme Court, mostly in relation to sections 7 and 8.
        • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          Even if you do get the courts protection recall the "“antagonizing” the federal government and police if they shared too much information about authorities snooping their customers’ personal data" aspect.
          "Telecom giants worried about ‘antagonizing’ feds on lawful access: documents" (May 21 2014)
  • When the ISP is forcibly shown who their real customers are, they will tow the line. Nice marketing play, though.

  • Including those residing in countries with International Data Treaties with Canada.

    Yes, that means the USA and the EU.

    Privacy. It's what's for Breakfast, Lunch, and Supper.

    Would you like some Poutine with that back bacon, American Privacy Ignorers?

  • Exactly how difficult, on a scale of say one to ten, do you think it will be for the Canadian cops to get warrants?
    • It's difficulty will be on a scale of one to ten how reasonable it is.

      "In 2011, the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association reported to Canada's privacy commissioner its members received 1.2 million requests for customer information in one year and disclosed information about 780,000 customers. []"

      I'm betting on a sizable dent in those numbers.

      • by jodido ( 1052890 )
        How sweet that you trust the courts to defend your rights. When is your sixth birthday, this year or next?
  • I love to hear it when places actually stand up for due process.
  • I have to applaud Rogers for doing the right thing.

    This may even be a first for them, seeing as they are one of the most evil corporations ever created.

    • Rogers... one of the most evil corporations ever created.

      I'm a Canadian, and I used to be a Rogers customer. Yes, they are evil, but they're nowhere near the top of the evilness ladder. Monsanto, Big Tobacco, and Big Pharma make companies like Rogers look positively saintly by comparison.

  • If I'm not mistaken, Voltage is still suing (re: subscriber info) Teksavvy for its customers pirating Hurt Locker or some shit...
  • The deenition of news is "Mad bites dog." If common sense becomes the news, you know that things are messed up.

"For a male and female to live continuously together is... biologically speaking, an extremely unnatural condition." -- Robert Briffault