Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Privacy, Property and Policy

Hidden Implications for the Information Highway

  • Chapter
Information, Innovation and Impacts

Part of the book series: Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation ((ESTI,volume 17))

  • 95 Accesses

Abstract

Contrary to popular wisdom, I have come to believe that technology is not neutral Technology is a choice, a way of doing something. And that choice cannot be isolated from its social and political consequences. This was true of the wheel, the wagon, the telegraph, the railroad. And it is true of the Internet.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Given the non-tangible nature of online communications, the primary focus of this paper is on intellectual property in general, and copyright law in particular.

    Google Scholar 

  2. MP3 (Motion Picture Experts Group, Audio Layer 3) is software that compresses digitalized audio files, which enables people to download audio files over the Internet with little loss of sound quality.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See Electronic Frontier Foundation, Digital Audio and Free Expression Policy Statement, http://www.eff.org/pub/Intellectual_property/Audio/EFF_audio_statement.html.

    Google Scholar 

  4. The suit was dismissed on June 15, 1999 by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. See p. 20 below. “Court approves Internet MP3 music recorders”, posted on CNN (http://www.cnn.com) on June 16, 1999 at 7:48 AM EDT (1148 GMT).

    Google Scholar 

  5. See “German MP3 sites shut down”, posted on CNN (http://www.cnn.com) on June 11, 1999 at: 3:34 p.m. EDT (1934 GMT)by Mark Lisabeth D’Amico.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Interview on CBC Radio, April 3, 1999 at 3:20 o’clock in the afternoon.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Note 4 supra.

    Google Scholar 

  8. In January, 1999, for example, the American National Music Publishers’ Association (a trade group in New York which represents more than 600 American music publishers) laid a criminal complaint against the International Lyric Server (http://www.lyrics.ch/) located in Basel, Switzerland and a Swiss District Attorney ordered the seizure of ILS’s computers as evidence in the upcoming trial. See http://www2.echo.lu/legal/en/news/9901/chapter 10. html#3.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The German branch of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry made this argument in their statement on MP3 piracy. See Note 4, supra.

    Google Scholar 

  10. The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade implicitly recognized this when it noted in a recent discussion paper that “atalthough digital networks increase possibilities of infringement of rights, it can also give rights holders an added ability to control access to and distribution of their works. Thus, solutions to the challenges will in some cases lie with the rightholders themselves.” Canada. Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. Canadian Trade Policy in Electronic Commerce, April 1999, p. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. v. Dyment (1988), 45 C.C.C. (3d) 244 at 254.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter v. Southam, [1984] 11 D.L.R. (4th) 641.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Paragraph 39, Magna Carta, 1215.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Under s. 487 of the Criminal Code, for example, a police officer may only search a building, receptacle or place once a justice is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe an offence has occurred there or the building, receptacle or place contains evidence pertaining to an offence, and a warrant has been issued.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, 35th Parliament, Evidence, Meeting No. 15, pp. 12-13

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. v. Wong (1990), 1 C.R. (4th) 1, 60 C.C.C. (3d) 460 (S.C.C.), reversing (1987), 56 C.R. (3d) 352, 34 C.C.C. (3d) 51 (Ont. Prov. Ct.).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Whether an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy is decided upon the totality of the circumstances, which may include: presence at the time of the search; possession or control of the property or place searched; ownership of the property or place; historical use of the property or place; existence of a subjective expectation of privacy; and existence of a subjective expectation of privacy. R. v. Edwards (1996), 26 O.R. 736, 192 N.R. 81 (S.C.C.)

    Google Scholar 

  18. The sole exception to this rule is when online communications are encrypted.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Data matching software can search through separate data bases and collate all information related to a particular individual. Data mining software uses artificial intelligence to search separate pools of data and identify previously unsuspected trends of behaviour.

    Google Scholar 

  20. (1993), 84 C.C.C. (3d) 203.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid, at 213.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Federal: Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.P-21; Alberta: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, S.A. 1994 c. F-18.5; B.C.: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C.1996, c.165, Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.373; Manitoba: Freedom of Information Act, S.M. 1985-86, c.6 (C.C.S.M.c.F-175), Privacy Act, S.M. 1970, c.74 (C.C.S.M. c.P-125); New Brunswick: Right to Information Act, S.N.B. 1978, c. R-10.3, Right to Information Amendment Act, S.N.B. 1995, c.51; Nova Scotia: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.N.S. 1993, c.5; Ontario: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.F-31; Quebec: An Act Respecting Access to Documents Held By Public Bodies and the Protection of Personal Information, S.Q. 1982 (L.R.Q. c.A-2.1); Saskatchewan: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, S.S. 1990-91, c.F-22.01, Privacy Act, S.S. 1990-91, c.P-24.

    Google Scholar 

  23. An Act Respecting the Protection of Personal Information in the Private Sector, S.Q. 1993, c.17

    Google Scholar 

  24. See Colin Bennett, “Rules of the Road and Level Playing Fields: The Politics of Data Protection in Canada’s Private Sector“, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 62 (December 1996), p. 486.

    Google Scholar 

  25. CAN/CSA-Q830-96.

    Google Scholar 

  26. CAN/CSA, supra

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ibid, p. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  28. S. 4, Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, 1st Session, 36th Parliament, 46-47 Elizabeth II, 1997-98, as amended.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Industry Canada/Justice Canada, The Protection of Personal Information: Building Canada’s Information Economy and Society (January 1998)., pp. 2-3

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ibid, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  31. See the submissions made by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and the Consumers Association of Canada to the Standing Committee on Industry, 36th Parliament, Evidence, meeting no. 81, December 8, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Section 5(2), Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, supra.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Standing Committee on Industry, 36th Parliament, Evidence, meeting no. 9, March 16, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Negotiations, done at Marrakech, Morocco, April 15, 1994, Annex 1C: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, April 15, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Diplomatic Conference on Certain Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Questions, Geneva, December 2 to 20, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  37. The three key issues identified included: whether electronic exchanges over the Internet are goods under the GATT or services under the GATS; how to ensure intellectual property rights are enforced on the Net; and how to resolve conflict of laws and disputes over legal jurisdiction. See Canada. Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. “Canadian Trade Policy in Electronic Commerce”, supra, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  39. The Work Programme on Electronic Commerce: Background Note by the Secretariat, WTO Documents IP/C/W/128.

    Google Scholar 

  40. European Commission. Green Paper. Combatting Counterfeiting and Piracy in the Single Market. No. COM/98/0569/FIN, December 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  41. For a detailed analysis of the impact of the printing press on intellectual property laws, see Shelley Wright, “Academic Freedom and Intellectual Property”, paper presented to the Academic Freedom: History of a Defining Idea Conference, University of Saskatchewan, September 19-22, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Section 3(1) of the Copyright Act provides that the holder of the copyright has the exclusive right to reproduce, produce, perform, publish, translate, adapt, record or film, communicate, exhibit, sell, rent, or distribute the protected works. R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, as amended.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Legal Advisory Board. Report on the Communication from the Commission: Follow-up to the Green Paper on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society, No. A4-297/97.

    Google Scholar 

  44. European Commission. Green Paper on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society, No. COM(95)0382 — C4-0354/95, pp. 51–52.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Legal Advisory Board, supra.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Section 6 of the Copyright Act provides that copyright subsists for the life of the author plus the end of the year in which the author dies plus fifty years.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Section 29 of the Copyright Act permits copying when it constitutes fair dealing with the work. Fair dealing occurs when the conduct is fair and equitable and has no material adverse commercial impact of the holder of the copyright. Specifically, fair dealing for the purpose of private study does not infringe copyright.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Legal Advisory Board, supra.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Canada, Privacy: Where Do We Draw the Line, Report of the House of Common Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities (Ottawa: April 1997)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wright, supra.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carleton University, Canada

    Valerie Steeves

Authors
  1. Valerie Steeves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. PRIME, University of Ottawa, Canada

    John De La Mothe  & Gilles Paquet  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Steeves, V. (2000). Privacy, Property and Policy. In: De La Mothe, J., Paquet, G. (eds) Information, Innovation and Impacts. Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation, vol 17. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4617-7_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4617-7_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7087-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-4617-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation