techlaw magazine

8/14/2019 Techlaw Magazine

1/36

PROFITING FROM

PEER PRODUCTION

BULLETIN DE DROIT ET TECHNOLO

LAW & TECHNOLOGY NEWSLETTE

01/08 // v5.1

2723


2/36

uOttawa Law & Technology ProgramuOttawa Programme de Droit et Technologie

www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/tech

contents

4 16 18BULLETIN DE DROIT ET TECHNOLOGIE

LAW & TECHNOLOGY NEWSLETTER

01/08 // v5.1

uOttawa Faculty of Law

75 Louis Pasteur Street

Ottawa, ON, CANADA K1N 6N5

Printed in Canada

The Open Access Law Program /Le programme Libre accs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Creative Commons Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Law Students Go Jump Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6The EDGE Network on the Emerging Dynamic Global Economies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Littering the Information Superhighway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7CIPPIC The Year in Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8The University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal (UOLTJ) /Revue de Droit et technologie de lUniversit dOttawa (RDTUO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Profiting from peer production / Profiter de la production par les pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11On the Identity Trail heads towards home stretch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Concentration in Law & Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17The Laws of Robotics, with Professor Ian Kerr /

Les lois de la robotique, avec le professeur Ian Kerr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Digital Music with Professor Jeremy de Beer /Musique numrique, avec le professeur Jeremy de Beer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) /Clinique dintrt public et de politique dInternet du Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Technology Law Internship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19The Option in Law and Technology/

Loption en Droit et technologie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Confrence commmorative Deirdre G. Martin en matire de droit relatifau respect de la vie prive / Deirdre G. Martin Memorial Lecture in Privacy Law . . . . . . . 22The Law & Technology Student Society (LTSS) /lAssociation des tudiants/tudiantes en droit et technologie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22The Epidemic of Lost and Stolen Data /Lpidmie de pertes et de vols de donnes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23The Privacy Network (TPN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Technology Law Speaker Series /Srie de confrences en droit des technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Le dterminisme gntique? /Genetic Determinism and Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Faculty news . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31


3/36

WELCOME

BIENVENUE

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 1

Cette anne encore, notre facult de droit a reu

plus de demandes dadmission que toutes les

autres au Canada, et bon nombre de candidats

dclarent avoir fait une demande lUniversit

dOttawa (certains disent, en fait, navoir faitaucune autre demande ailleurs) en raison du

programme de Droit et technologie. Il est vrai

que notre programme a connu une croissance

spectaculaire et que nos ralisations des dernires

annes sont extraordinaires bien des gards.

En effet, nous avons en outre mis sur pied la

seule clinique dintrt public et de politique

dInternet du Canada (CIPPIC), organis des stages

exclusifs en droit des technologies et runi un

corps professoral de renomme mondiale.

Our law school yet again received more

applications than any other in Canada, and

many applicants tell us that they chose, and

often applied only to, the University of Ottawa

because of our Law & Technology program. Itis true that the program has

grown by leaps and bounds,

and the accomplishments of the last few years

are extraordinary by any standard. The only

public interest, internet and technology law

clinic in Canada (CIPPIC), unique technology

law internships, and a world-class Faculty

that is truly second to none.


4/36

TECHLAW //2

In the following pages, you will read about some of the eventsorganized by the program, including the speakers who have visitedour law school, in particular as part of our Torys Technology LawSpeaker Series, which is always very well attended. We werehonoured by the visit of the Chief Justice of Canada, the Rt Hon.Beverly McLachlin and two of the colleagues, Justices Fish and

Rothstein. Justice Rothstein delivered a keynote address at a majorinternational conference on privacy and the Internet, Revealed_I,which marked the end of Professor Ian Kerrs (Canada ResearchChair in Ethics, Law & Technology) 5-year project, On The IdentityTrail. Our technology law Faculty, the largest in the country, hascontinued to blog actively and to contribute in myriad ways topolicy debates, from privacy protection (or absence thereof) toconsumer protection in online transactions. Professor Michael Geist(Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law) hascontinued to play a key part on several fronts, including identitytheft and copyright reform. We were also very happy that ProfessorTeresa Scassa joined our Faculty to teach intellectual property andtechnology law courses in both English and French and to pursue avery active research agenda.

The Common Law Section also celebrates two major anniver-

saries this year: 50 years for the Common Law Sectionand 30 years of common law en franais. Our technologylaw program is an essential component of our success, aprogram that is both bilingual and bijural. A perfectlynatural outcome for Canadas law school.

Finally, we have just selected the architects who willwork with us to build a much-needed extension to Fauteux Hall

and complete renovation of the Brian Dickson Library. The newbuilding will reflect our core values: sustainable development, highfaculty-student interaction and interactive learning, and the verylatest technology to help our students learn, work together andstudy. More on this shortly. //

Acting Dean Daniel Gervais

Professor Gervais is a member of the Law & Technology group and theActing Dean of the Common Law Section of the Facutly of Law. Hislatest book, Intellectual Property, Trade & Development, was publishedin 2007 by Oxford University Press.

Les pages qui suivent traitent de certaines activits organises parlquipe du Programme. Il y est notamment question de notre sriede confrences Torys sur le droit des technologies, toujours trscourue. Nous avons, jusquici, eu lhonneur dy recevoir la juge enchef du Canada, la trs honorable Beverly McLachlin, ainsi que deuxde ses collgues, MM. les juges Fish et Rothstein. M. le juge

Rothstein a dailleurs prononc une allocution privilgie lors dunimportant congrs international sur la confidentialit et lInternet, Revealed_I , qui marquait la conclusion dun projet quinquennaldu professeur Ian Kerr (Chaire de recherche du Canada en thique,en droit et en technologie), intitul On The Identity Trail . Lesprofesseurs de Droit et technologie ont continu dalimenter leursblogues et ont contribu de diverses faons des dbats dorienta-tion de politique sur divers sujets, allant de la protection de la vieprive (ou de labsence dune telle protection) la protection de laconfidentialit des transactions effectues en ligne par les consom-mateurs. Le professeur Michael Geist (Chaire de recherche duCanada en droit dInternet et du commerce lectronique) a continude jouer un rle fondamental plusieurs gards, notamment dansles domaine du vol didentit et de la rforme du droit dauteur.Nous somme galement trs heureux de larrive, au sein de notre

corps professoral, de la professeure Teresa Scassa, qui enseigne, enanglais et en franais, dans les domaines de la proprit intellectuelleet du droit des technologies, en plus de sinvestir dans dimposantsprojets de recherche.

La Section Common Law clbre galement cette anne deuxanniversaires dimportance, soit les 50 ans dexistence de notreSection de common law et les 30 ans denseignement de la commonlaw en franais. Notre programme de Droit et technologie, de par sanature bilingue et bijuridique, constitue une composante essentiellede notre succs. Il sagit l dun aboutissement tout fait naturelpour la Facult de droit du Canada .

Enfin, nous venons darrter le choix des architectes quitravailleront avec nous la construction dune trs ncessaireannexe au pavillon Fauteux, de mme qu lachvement de la rno-vation de la bibliothque Brian Dickson. La nouvelle annexerefltera nos valeurs fondamentales : dveloppement durable, interac-tion soutenue entre tudiants et membres du corps professoral etapprentissage interactif, et technologie de pointe pour aider nostudiants apprendre, travailler ensemble et tudier. Dautresnouvelles ce sujet suivront prochainement. //

Daniel Gervais, doyen par intrim

Le Professeur Daniel Gervais est un membre du Groupe de Droit& Technologie et le Doyen par Intrim de la Facult de Droit. Sondernier livre, Intellectual Property, Trade & Development a t publien 2007 par lditeur Oxford University Press.


5/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 3

TECHLAW:THE LAW & TECHNOLOGY MAGAZINEVOLUME 5, ISSUE 1

uOttawa Faculty of Law

75 Louis Pasteur StreetOttawa, ON, CANADA K1N 6N5

Editor:Andy Kaplan-Myrth

Publisher: University of Ottawa,Law & Technology Program

The University of Ottawa Technology Law Newsletter is published seasonally

by the University of Ottawas Faculty of Law. The opinions expressed in this

newsletter are solely those of the contributors and are not necessarily those of

the editor, sponsors, the University of Ottawa or its employees.

Some Rights Reserved. This newsletter is licensed under the Creative

Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Licence. To view a copy of

this licence,visit: creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca

Comments: Readers are invited to submit their comments and suggestionsto the Editor.

This newsletter is available free-of-charge online at http://www.commonlaw.

uottawa.ca/tech. To unsubscribe to this newsletter, send an email to

[email protected]. If you were forwarded the newsletter by a friend and

would like to subscribe, send an email to the same address.

Disclaimer: This newsletter is for informational purposes only. It is not

intended to be a complete statement of the law, nor is it intended to provide

legal advice. No person should act or rely upon the information in this

newsletter without seeking professional legal consultation.

TECHLAW:BULLETIN DE DROIT ET TECHNOLOGIEVOLUME 5, NUMRO 1

Facult de droit, Universit dOttawa

57, rue Louis-PasteurOttawa ON K1N 6N5 CANADA

Rdaction :Andy Kaplan-Myrth

Publication : Universit dOttawa, Programme de droit et technologie

Le Bulletin de droit et technologie de lUniversit dOttawa est publi de faon

saisonnire par la Facult de droit de lUniversit dOttawa. Les opinions

exprimes dans ce bulletin refltent la pense des auteurs seulement et pas

ncessairement celle de la rdaction, des commanditaires, de lUniversit

dOttawa ou de son personnel.

Certains droits rservs. Ce bulletin fait lobjet dune licence Creative

Commons de style attribution pas de travaux drivs utilisation non

commerciale. La licence est publie ladresse creativecommons.org/licenses/

by-nc-nd/2.5/ca.

Commentaires : La rdaction serait heureuse de recevoir les commentaires et

suggestions des lecteurs et lectrices.

Ce bulletin est offert gratuitement en ligne ladresse http://www.commonlaw.

uottawa.ca/tech. Si vous dsirez vous dsabonner de ce bulletin, veuillez envoyer

un message lectronique [email protected]. Si vous avez reu ce bulletin par

lintermdiaire dun ami ou dune amie et que vous aimeriez vous y abonner,

veuillez envoyer un message lectronique la mme adresse.

Avertissement : Ce bulletin cherche uniquement vous renseigner et non

vous fournir un expos complet de ltat du droit ou un avis juridique. Nous

dconseillons quiconque dagir en se fiant sur les renseignements publis

dans ce bulletin et sans obtenir une opinion juridique professionnelle.

LA FACULT DE DROIT ET TECHNOLOGIE /LAW & TECHNOLOGY FACULTYJane Bailey

Jennifer Chandler

Jeremy deBeer

Karen Eltis

Daniel Gervais

Chaire de recherche universitaire sur le droit

de la proprit intellectuelle; le professeur

Oslers en droit de la technologie; doyen

intrimaire de la Section de common law /

University Research Chairin Intellectual Property;

Osler Professor of Law;

Acting Dean of Common Law

Michael Geist

Canada Research Chair in Internet

and E-commerce Law /

Chaire de recherche du Canada

en droit dInternet et du

commerce lectronique

Mistrale Goudreau

Elizabeth Judge

Ian Kerr

Canada Research Chair in Ethics,

Law & Technology /


en thique, droit et technologie

Andy Kaplan-Myrth

Manager / Gestionnaire

Marina PavlovicTeresa Scassa


en droit de linformation /

Canada Research Chair in Information Law

Val Steeves

Cross-appointment:

Department of Criminology

Canadian InternetPolicy and Public InterestClinic (CIPPIC) / Cliniquedintrt public et depolitique dinternetdu Canada

David FewerStaff Counsel / Avocat-conseil

Philippa Lawson

Director / Directrice


6/36

TECHLAW //4

The Open Access Law Program, launched in June 2005,is a part of the Science Commons Scholars Copyright Project,

http://sciencecommons.org/ projects/publishing/index.html, which

is working to support open access to scholarly research in a wide

range of disciplines in science and social science, including law.

The Scholars Copyright Project aims to increase access to knowl-

edge by reducing the technological, economic, and legal barriers

that have traditionally restricted access to scholarship. The Open

Access Law Program, of which Open Access Law Canada is a part,

specifically promotes open access to legal scholarship.

THE OPEN ACCESS LAW PROGRAM

Open access provides free public accessto scholarly literature and promotes thedissemination of this scholarship, whichbenefits the author, the law review, and thepublic. Some of the benefits of open accessfor scholarly publication are to permit quickdissemination of scholarship, to increaseaccess to research for educational purposes,to increase awareness of research among thepublic, to allow authors to receive com-ments and feedback in a timely manner, andto facilitate global scholarly conversations.Open access for legal scholarship enhancesthe profile of the law review, with increasedcitation and visibility, and raises awarenessof the institution hosting the law review.

Law reviews that join the Open AccessLaw Canada program promise to take theleast restrictive licence consistent with thelaw reviews needs, to send the authors anelectronic copy of the final version of theirarticle, and to provide public access to thelaw reviews standard publishing contract so

authors can consult the publication agree-ment before submitting their articles. Lawreviews are not required to set up an onlinearchive of articles or publish online. Theyjust need to agree that the authors can postelectronic copies of their articles to scholarlywebsites so people can access the articleseven if they dont have a subscription to alegal database.

The Open Access Law Canada programprovides a number of resources to encourageopen access archiving, which are available

through the websites for Open Access LawCanada, http://www.openaccesslawcanada.ca(in English), and Libre accs au droit Canada,http://www.libreaccesaudroitcanada.ca (enFranais). The resources include a CanadianModel Publishing Agreement, which hasbeen specifically tailored to Canadian law,and is available as a template for law reviewsto adopt. //

Open access for legal

scholarship enhances

the profile of the law

review, with increased

citation and visibility,

and raises awareness of

the institution hostingthe law review.

Professor Elizabeth Judge is projectleader for Open Access Law Canada,http://www.openaccesslawcanada.ca/, aninitiative launched this year to assistCanadian law reviews to move to an openaccess publication model, which permitsauthors to archive their law review articles in

publicly accessible scholarly websites.


7/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 5

LE PROGRAMME

LIBRE ACCS

Le libre accs est laccs public gratuit auxtravaux drudition. Il favorise la diffusiondes recherches, ce qui est avantageux pourlauteur, les revues juridiques et le grandpublic. Certaines retombes positives sont ladiffusion rapide de la recherche, un plusvaste accs la recherche des fins duca-tives, une plus grande sensibilisation dupublic la recherche, lobtention plus simul-tane de commentaires et dobservations surla recherche et la facilitation des changesentre universitaires dans le monde. Le libreaccs la recherche rudite en droitrehausse le profil des revues juridiques, quisont ainsi plus frquemment cites et plusvisibles. Par ricochet, ltablissement qui enassure la publication se fait mieux connatre.

Les revues de droit qui participent auprogramme Libre accs au droit Canadasengagent utiliser une licence aussi peurestrictive que possible en tenant comptedes besoins de la revue, fournir auxauteurs une copie lectronique de la versionfinale de leur article et offrir un accspublic au contrat type de publication de leur

revue afin que les auteurs puissent consulterlentente de publication avant de soumettreun article. Les revues de droit nont aucuneobligation de tenir des archives lectro-niques des articles ou de publier les articlesen ligne. Il leur suffit de permettre auxauteurs de publier leurs articles sur des sitesWeb savants afin de les rendre accessibles

aux personnes qui ne sont pas abonnes des bases de donnes juridiques.

Le programme Libre accs au droitCanada fournit des ressources diverses surses sites Web, en anglais ladressehttp://www. openaccesslawcanada.ca et enfranais ladresse http://www. libreacce-saudroitcanada.ca pour encourager larchivageen libre accs. Parmi ces ressources, il y a unmodle canadien dentente de publication,conu dans loptique particulire du droitcanadien. Ce modle est mis la dispositiondes revues de droit qui aimeraient seninspirer et ladopter. //

Le libre accs la

recherche rudite en

droit rehausse le profil

des revues juridiques,

qui sont ainsi plusfrquemment cites

et plus visibles.

Professeure Elizabeth Judge est la directricedu projet Libre accs au droit Canada,http://www.libreaccesaudroitcanada.ca, misen uvre cette anne pour aider les revues dedroit canadiennes faire le passage vers lemodle de la publication en libre accs, lequel

permet lauteure ou auteur [auteur]darchiver ses articles parus dans une revue

juridique sur des sites Web accessibles augrand public.

Lanc en juin 2005, dans le cadre du projet de droit dauteur sur lhritage scientifique commun,

http://sciencecommons.org/ projects/publishing/ index.html, le programme Libre accs au droit

Canada cherche promouvoir le libre accs la recherche rudite dans une grande diversit de

champs des sciences et des sciences sociales, y compris le droit. Le projet de droit dauteur sur

la recherche rudite (Scholars Copyright Project) veut faciliter laccs au savoir en liminant les

obstacles technologiques, conomiques et juridiques qui, traditionnellement, ont limit laccs

aux travaux rudits. Le programme Libre accs au droit, dont fait partie le projet Libre accs audroit Canada, prconise plus particulirement le libre accs la recherche savante en droit.


8/36

TECHLAW //6

One of the most important benefits of the internet is the ease withwhich information can be shared among users, whether those usersare professional artists, audiences, or users who also generatecreative works. The internet is built for sharing, but creative worksonline are subject to the same copyright laws that restrict sharingoffline. This is where Creative Commons licences come in.

An organization based in San Francisco, Creative Commons

provides copyright licences that allow authors and artists to retainownership and control of their creative works while allowing thoseworks to be used more freely than would otherwise be possible. Bylicensing a work under a Creative Commons licence, authors andartists can say Some Rights Reserved instead of All Rights Reserved,restoring balance and moderation to the dynamic of copyright.

While the original Creative Commons licences were drafted in theUS and reflect American law, they have been ported to 34 countriesaround the world, with 9 more currently in the drafting stage.Creative Commons Canada, based here in the Law & Technologygroup, created the first international ports of the licences when wereleased the Canadian licences in 2004.

Creative Commons Canada is working on the newest version ofthe CC licences, version 3.0, and has other projects in the worksincluding a large initiative that will make public domain works inCanada much easier to identify. Last year, Andy Kaplan-Myrth of theLaw & Technology group worked with a student, KathleenSimmons, to produce the Podcasting Legal Guide for Canada, aresource requested by the podcasting community to help them navi-gate Copyright law and internet broadcasting in Canada.

By licensing a work under a Creative

Commons licence, authors and artists

can say Some Rights Reserved

instead of All Rights Reserved

Together with Marcus Bornfreund in Toronto and Tina Piper at McGillUniversity in Montreal, Andy takes every opportunity he is given totell people about CC licences and encourage people to use them. //

The EDGE Network on theEmerging Dynamic GlobalEconomiesThe EDGE Network on the Emerging Dynamic Global Economies isa Canadian-based, international partnership of people working oninterdisciplinary issues relating to emerging economies. ProfessorJeremy de Beer leads the research theme on technology and intellec-tual property. He and his collaborators, including uOttawa doctoralcandidate Lihong Li, are working on an important project,Strategies to Implement the World Intellectual PropertyOrganizations Development Agenda. This work, funded by theInternational Development Research Centre and the EDGENetwork, involves a team of experts from around the world who arelooking at ways to make a concrete contribution to the reform ofinternational intellectual property law and policy. We are rethinkingold policies and questioning the effectiveness of existing rules.Through this international collaborative project, Professor de Beerand his team are committed to understanding and influencing therelationship between intellectual property and access to knowledge,and ensuring that the WIPO Development Agenda is as effective aspossible in practice. //

We are rethinking old policies and

questioning the effectiveness of

existing rules.

LAWSTUDENTS

GO JUMPSTREETMembers of Law & Technology Students

Association (LTSS) went back to high

school this last spring. In partnership

with the Ontario Public Legal Education

Initiative (OPLEI), the group visited Hillcrest

High School to talk with grade 11 students

about Facebook and potential privacyrisks posed by social networking sites. //


9/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 7

Littering the

INFORMATION

SUPERHIGHWAYThe study of technology law is inherently a forward-looking process.Consumers are encouraged to consider present technology obsoleteas they too, look forward to future developments. Rarely are thecomplete lifecycles taken into account when the devices of years pastare overshadowed byglittering technologies lurking just around thecorner. In the process, old equipment is routinely moved into closets,under beds, to China or wherever it will stay out of sight.

This past spring, a group of law students started taking a closerlook at what happens to all this high tech trash. Ashley Deathe andJeremy Hessing-Lewis, two third year common law students, organ-ized The Integrated Circuit: A Symposium on Electronic Waste inCanada in search of some answers. The project was the first partner-

ship between the Law & Technology Students Association (LTSS)and the Environmental Law Students Association (ELSA) andbrought together electronics manufacturers, recyclers and theconsumers stuck in between. The keynote address was given byElizabeth Grossman, author of High Tech Trash: Digital Devices,Hidden Toxics, and Human Health.

The symposium was accompanied by a successful e-waste drivecollecting a large amount of used electronics from students and staffalike. The event attracted regional and campus wide media atten-tion. The success prompted both student societies to plan onmaking it an annual event. //


10/36

TECHLAW //8

On the advocacy front, CIPPIC participated in two courtproceedings. In Lawson v. Accusearch Inc., 2007 FC 125, CIPPICsought judicial review of a decision of the Privacy Commissionerof Canada not to investigate a complaint that an American databroker was violating Canadian privacy law. CIPPICsuccessfully argued that the company, despite beinglocated in the United States, nonetheless enjoyedsufficient real and substantial connections to Canada forthe Commissioner to assert her investigative jurisdiction.

The start of a new academic year brings with it an opportunity for

CIPPIC to review its accomplishments over the past year. And it has

been an extremely busy year.

CIPPIC The Year in Review

In Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs, 2007

SCC 34, CIPPIC intervened at the Supreme Court of Canadato argue that an arbitration clause in the terms and conditionsof an e-commerce website should not, as a matter of publicorder in Quebec civil law, deny consumers recourse to classactions. In a decision strongly favouring private ordering andfreedom of contract, the Court held otherwise. The decisionsuggests that the courts will not intervene in consumercontracts on fairness considerations, and that consumer advo-cates should instead turn to legislatures to address fairnessissues in consumer contracts.

Outside of the courtroom, CIPPIC was equally busy. CIPPIC was,once again, occupied with copyright advocacy involving work withmusicians, artists, software designers and documentary filmmakersto assist them in voicing their concerns on copyright policy. Ourwork with documentary filmmakers has led to more work on devel-oping best practices for fair dealing with copyrighted work. Otherprojects include participation in Canadian stakeholder consulta-tions with respect to the WIPO Broadcasters Treaty, participatingbefore a Parliamentary Committee reviewing Canadas federalprivate section privacy law, and the drafting and release of a Reporton Digital Rights Management and Consumer Privacy. This latterreport was funded by a grant under the Office of the PrivacyCommissioner of Canadas Grants and Contributions Program.

CIPPICs 2007 summer internship program was, again, a greatsuccess. Janet Lo (uOttawa), Candice Skelton (Queens), PhilippeShink (UNB) and Shaun Gluckman (McGill) worked on a variety ofprojects and cases during their twelve week stint at CIPPIC.Matthew Lui (Queens) joined CIPPIC as a volunteer intern for fourweeks, and numerous other students volunteered throughout the

summer. Summer students projects and case files included: investigating and preparing complaints to the Privacy

Commissioner; advising clients and assisting other organizations on matters

involving privacy rights, copyright and trademark law; preparing a submission to a Senate Committee on Bill C-31

(Elections Act reform); attending and reporting on Parliamentary Committee meet-

ings on Identity Theft; investigating cases of alleged misleading advertising and

unjust discrimination under the Telecommunications Act;

preparing advocacy materials on consumercopyright issues; and

preparing applications to the CompetitionBureau and Privacy Commissioner of Canadaregarding the Google-DoubleClick merger.

The summer also saw the departure of one articling student, TaraBerish, who was called to the bar of Ontario and has now joined theJustice Department, and the arrival of another, Jocelyn Cleary, a recentgraduate of the law school at the University of Windsor. Both posi-tions were funded through CIPPICs selection as one of six Ontariopublic interest organizations to receive funding for an articling studentunder the Law Foundation of Ontarios Public Interest ArticlingFellowship program.

The 2007-08 academic year promises to be, again, extremelybusy. CIPPIC received a $50,000 grant under the Office of thePrivacy Commissioner of Canadas Grants and ContributionsProgram to study online privacy threats. CIPPIC is currentlyresearching technological and regulatory issues and will report on itfindings in the spring of 2008. Projects involving fair consumer

contracting practices and identity theft research continue. CIPPICscopyright advocacy also continues once again, rumours ofpending copyright legislation are reverberating around Ottawa.CIPPIC, as always, looks forward to advancing the public interest inthese policy debates. //


11/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 9

The University

of Ottawa Law& TechnologyJournal UOLTJThe University of Ottawa Law & Technology

Journal(UOLTJ) published two issues last

year, continuing its tradition of featuring

interdisciplinary law and technology schol-

arship by an international roster of authors.

A special issue devoted to privacy, anonymity,

and identity had eleven contributions from

Canadian and US authors tackling subjects

such as anonymity in behavioural research,

childrens online privacy, the right to privacy

and terrorism law in Canada, racial profiling,

privacy in virtual communities, privacy

classifi cations, and cyber-security for online

user information without privacy erosion. Thesecond issue considered internet content

regulation in Australia, commercialization

of university research, a comparison of

Canadian and European internet jurisdiction

principles, the law of the hyperlink, Canadian

copyright and P2P sharing, TRIPS and climate

change, patent law and non-coding DNA,

and electronic commerce norms. This year,

the Journal includes articles on open accesslaw, cybercrime, privacy under civil law, and

Fichte and copyright theory.


12/36

TECHLAW //10

The Journal is an open access, bilingual, peer-reviewed academicjournal, with Professor Elizabeth Judge serving as Editor-in-Chiefand Professor Marina Pavlovic as the Managing Editor. The Journalpublishes scholarship on the intersection of law with established or

emerging technologies in any field, such as computer, internet ande-commerce law; privacy; intellectual property; technology andethics; communications, entertainment, and social media; naturalsciences; traditional knowledge; evidence; cybercrime; security; ande-government. The Journals contributors so far hail from Canada,the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Australia, Belgium,Finland, and Germany, and from a range of disciplines, includinglaw, psychology, philosophy, sociology, communications, computersciences, engineering, and cryptography.

Since its inception in 2003, the UOLTJ has been distinguished by itscommitment to advancing the free public accessibility of legal informa-tion and legal scholarship. The Journal is listed as a member of theDirectory of Open Access Journals and the Open Access Law programand the Journals full content is freely available online on the Journalswebsite, www.uoltj.ca (in English) and www.rdtuo.ca (en franais).

The Journal also has an innovative educational aspect. All of theJournals student Assistant Editors receive intensive specialized training inlaw and technology research through a 3-credit law course, the TechnologyLaw Journal Internship. This course, unique in Canada, and offered toboth undergraduate and graduate law students, combines three compo-nents of advanced legal research and methodology instruction; an intensiveintroduction to law review editing, legal publication, and the Journals openaccess citation style; and exposure to law and technology scholarship andthe open access movement. //

Deux numros de la Revue de Droit et technologie de lUniversitdOttawa (RDTUO) ont t publis lan dernier. Fidle la tradition,cette revue publie toujours des articles interdisciplinaires spcialissen matire de droit et de technologie, en provenance dauteurs dumonde entier. Dans le cadre de notre numro spcial ayant pourthme principal la protection de la vie prive, de lanonymat et delidentit, nous avons reu onze contributions dauteurs canadiens etamricains, traitant de sujets comme lanonymat dans la recherchesur le comportement, la scurit des enfants sur Internet, le droit lavie prive dans le contexte de la loi sur le terrorisme au Canada, leprofilage racial, la confidentialit dans les communauts virtuelles,la classification des notions de confidentialit et la cyberscurit desrenseignements personnels des utilisateurs de lInternet sans pertede protection. Notre deuxime numro abordait diverses thma-tiques, notamment les rglements quant aux contenus Internet enAustralie, la commercialisation des recherches universitaires, unecomparaison des principes juridictionnels canadiens et europensen matire dInternet, le droit en matire dhyperlien, les droits dau-

teur et le partage poste--poste au Canada, les ADPIC et leschangements climatiques, le droit des brevets et les brins dADNnon codants, et les normes du commerce lectronique. Cette anne,le magazine comporte des articles sur le libre accs au droit, sur lecybercrime, sur la protection de la vie prive en vertu des lois civileset sur la thorie de Fichte et les droits dauteur.

La Revue est une publication bilingue en libre accs, dont les articlessont rviss par son comit de lecture constitu de pairs. La professeureElizabeth Judge en est la rdactrice en chef et la professeure MarinaPavlovic, lditrice. La Revue publie des articles spcialiss portantsur la convergence du droit et de technologies diverses, tablies ou

nouvelles, dans tous domaines : droit de linformatique, de lInternetet du commerce lectronique; protection de la vie prive; propritintellectuelle; technologie et thique; communications, industrie dudivertissement et mdias sociaux; sciences naturelles; savoir tradi-tionnel; preuve; cybercrime; scurit et gouvernance lectronique. Lesauteurs qui ont contribu au magazine jusquici proviennent duCanada, des tats-Unis, du Royaume-Uni, de la Chine, de lAustralie,de la Belgique, de la Finlande et de lAllemagne, et uvrent dansune varit de disciplines, notamment le droit, la psychologie, laphilosophie, la sociologie, les communications, linformatique, legnie et la cryptographie.

Depuis sa fondation en 2003, la RDTUO sest distingue par sonengagement favoriser le libre accs la documentation et lexper-tise juridique. La Revue est inscrite au Rpertoire des publicationsscientifiques gratuites et au programme Libre accs au droit , etson contenu intgral peut tre consult librement ladressewww.rdtuo.ca pour la version franaise, et ladresse www.uoltj.capour la version anglaise.

La Revue comporte galement un aspect ducatif novateur. Tous lestudiants adjoints la rdaction reoivent une formation pousse enrecherche en droit et technologie dans le cadre dun cours de troiscrdits, le stage de la Revue de droit et technologie. Ce cours, exclusifdans tout le Canada et ouvert aux tudiants de premier et de deuximecycle, comporte trois volets : recherche et de mthodologie juridiquesapprofondies; introduction intensive au travail de rvision et de publi-cation dun priodique juridique spcialis et au style de citation enlibre accs; familiarisation avec les mcanismes de recherche en droit ettechnologie et au mouvement de libre accs. //

Revue de Droit et technologie delUniversit dOttawa (RDTUO)


13/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 11

Viacoms billion-dollar lawsuit against YouTube1 has gene-rated a lot of buzz in the legal and high-tech communities.Pundits around the world have weighed in on YouTubespotential liabilities, though ultimately it will be the American

courts that settle those issues. Since the list of plaintiffshas grown to include Britains Football Association PremierLeague, the U.S. National Music Publishers Association andothers seeking certification as a class action, the prospectfor settlements satisfactory to all parties is slim.

Profitingfrom peerproduction

1 Viacom International Inc. et. al. v. YouTube Inc. et. al., Civil Action No. 1:07-cv-02103 (LLS) (FM) (S.D.N.Y).

Jeremy De Beer


14/36

TECHLAW //12

While the courts consider the case, it isworthwhile to reflect on the broader conse-quences of this kind of litigation for thenetworked information economy. At the endof the day, lawsuits like this are only good forlawyers. Consumers, creators and contentowners would be far better off to focus onstreamlining licensing solutions rather thanstubbornly litigating disagreements.

Let me first say a few words about thecase itself and the U.S. legal environment.

YouTube is being sued for direct and indirectcopyright infringement. Viacom alleges thatYouTube directly reproduces, performs anddistributes its copyright-protected content.It also alleges that YouTube is secondarilyliable for users infringements on threegrounds: contributory, vicarious and indu -cing copyright infringement.

If no settlement is reached, the outcomeof this case will depend mainly on the appli-cation of the safe harbour system under theDigital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA).2

Pursuant to 512 a firm hosting allegedlyinfringing material at the direction of its useris not liable for infringement if it complieswith notice-and-takedown procedures. Butto get immunity, the host cant know aboutthe infringement or even be aware ofcircumstances from which infringement is

apparent. Moreover, the host cant receivefinancial benefits directly from the infringe-ment in a situation where it has the right andability to control its users activity.

Theres much debate about what all thatmeans, and little precedent to go on.Opinion divided on YouTubes prospects fora successful defence in the U.S..

The situation is even more uncertain inCanada. But the odds are that YouTube wouldlose a Canadian lawsuit like this. Howwould things play out north of the border?

In Canada, firms potential liabilities aredetermined by different principles than in the

U.S.. There are, however, some similarities.Canadian copyright law, like American law,grants exclusive reproduction and perform-ance/communication rights for audio, visualand audio-visual content. It isnt clear howother aspects of the Canadian Copyright Actmight apply here, including provisionspertaining to distribution rights, adaptationrights, synchronization rights and so on. Butit is safe to say that in both jurisdictions thereare a number of different grounds on which aprima facie case for direct infringement couldbe made. That is, it is likely that YouTubecould be held liable for its own infringingactivities, including reproducing and

communicating copyright-protected works.The key differences between Canada and

the U.S. boil down to the nuances of indirectinfringementliability for other peoplesinfringementsand applicable defences.Canadian law imposes liability for authorizingacts of infringement, but not for simply con-tributing to, benefiting from or inducing them.

The odds are that YouTubewould lose a Canadian lawsuitlike this. How would things play

out north of the border?

La poursuite dun milliard de dollarsintente par Viacom contre YouTube asuscit une grande effervescence dans lemonde juridique comme dans lunivers de latechnologie de pointe. Les sommits dumonde entier se sont prononces quant auxpossibles responsabilits de YouTube, bienque le rglement du diffrend revienneultimement aux tribunaux amricains. Lesperspectives de rglements satisfaisantspour toutes les parties sont amoindries parlajout, la liste des plaignants, de la Football Association Premier League britannique, de l U.S. National Music

Publishers Association et dautres organi-smes cherchant exercer un recours collectif.

lheure o les tribunaux tudient cetteaffaire, il est opportun de rflchir auxconsquences plus tendues de tels litigessur lconomie de linformation en rseau. Toutcompte fait, des poursuites de ce genre neprofitent quaux avocats. Il serait plus avan-tageux pour les consommateurs, pour lescrateurs et pour les propritaires de contenude viser des solutions de rationali sation en

matire doctroi de licences plutt que desacharner vouloir rgler leurs diffrendsdevant les tribunaux.

Dans cet article, Jeremy de Beer aprs avoirenvisag la tournure que prendrait, au Canada,une poursuite comme celle qui oppose Viacom YouTube, se penche sur les conomies engen-dres par la production par les pairs. Lesentreprises se rendent compte quil y beaucoupdargent en jeu et prennent en marche le traindes contenus produits par des pairs.

Le chevauchement de lconomie com-merciale et de lconomie de partageengendre son lot de tensions. On distingue

difficilement les contenus pirats de ceuxqui sont fournis par des pairs. Cest unetche ardue que deffectuer un tri dans un telventail de contenus. Qui plus est, commede nombreuses entreprises uvrant dans cedomaine souffrent dune certaine forme deschizophrnie, lconomie de linformation enrseau comporte toute une gamme dintrtsqui se recoupent.

Le professeur de Beer conclut quunebonne option pour les entreprises qui

sintressent la production entre pairsconsiste envisager les possibilits doctroi delicences, y compris incluant dventuellesmgatransactions entre les magnats de lindus-trie, des licences gnrales collectives et desinitiatives comme les Creative Commons .Ces stratgies ncessitent des concessions depart et dautre du litige entourant les droitsdauteurs, mais ces concessions se rvleronttrs avantageuses, puisquelles rduirontsubstantiellement les dommages collatrauxpour ceux qui choisissent de souscrire uneconomie parallle de partage. long terme,cest sans doute lintrt public qui en tirerait

le plus davantages. //

Professeur Jeremy de Beer est membre du groupeDroit et technologie. Il donne le cours deMusique numrise, dont la description figuredans cette revue. Son tude sur lobtention delicences pour les uvres orphelines, pour lecompte de la Commission du droit dauteur duCanada sera publie prochainement.

PROFITER DE LA PRODUCTION PAR LES PAIRS Jeremy De Beer


15/36

2 17 U.S.C. 512.3 Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd. v Sharman License Holdings Ltd., [2005] FCA 1242; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc et al. v. Grokster, Ltd et al. , 545 U.S. 913, 125 S. Ct. 2764 (2005).4 CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2004 SCC 13.5 Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v. Canadian Assn. of Internet Providers, 2004 SCC 45.6 Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006) at 2.

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 13

intellectual property laws of most countries.If this seems anomalous, considerColumbia law professor Tim Wus analogy.Wu explains that if the internet were ared-light district, Napster, Kazaa andGrokster would be the pimps while YouTube

would be the hotel.A Canadian safe harbour for hosts andtransmitters is found in paragraph 2.4(1)(b)of the Copyright Act. It provides that personswho only supply the means of telecommuni-cation necessary for another person to socommunicate are not themselves parties tothe communication. The leading case on thispoint is SOCAN v. CAIP,5 in which theSupreme Court of Canada consideredwhether internet service providers were liableto pay a tariff (SOCANs Tariff 22) for theonline communication of musical works. TheCourt held they were not. An intermediaryfalls within the safe harbour so long as it

confines itself to providing a conduit forinformation communicated by others. Theuse of techniques to improve the efficiency ofcommunications, such as caching, does notaffect intermediaries legal liability.

Unlike the U.S. provision, however, theCanadian safe harbour does not apply toactivities other than communication. Aservice provider or host might still be liablefor reproductions that occur when contentis cached. (Canadian broadcasters have liti-gated and lobbied unsuccessfully against acopyright tariff requiring payments forephemeral reproductions.) Or, a serviceprovider or host might be held to authorizethe infringing acts of its customers.

SOCAN v. CAIP also dealt with that ques-tion. The Court found that when massiveamounts of non-copyrighted material areaccessible to the end user, it is not possibleto impute an authority to downloadcopyrighted material as opposed to non-copyrighted material. However, JusticesBinnies obiter dicta suggests that copyrightliability may exist if a service provider hasnotice of infringing material on its systemand fails to take remedial action.

What sort of remedial action might berequired? Well, the Court hinted that uponnotice of infringing content, the host mightbe required to take it down.

Canadian legislators might have adopteda different approach. In 2005, Bill C-60 was

introduced to reform parts of Canadiancopyright law. Though the Bill died beforepassing into law, it would have established anotice-and-notice system. That means afirm notified of alleged infringement couldhave escaped liability by forwarding thenotice to its customer. Though less strictthan a notice-and-takedown or notice-and-termination regime, it has beenreported to be nonetheless effective. The Billalso would have immunized network servicesfrom all liability for caching, including commu-nications and reproductions.

The U.S. litigation against YouTubeshould provoke Canadians to ask another

question when designing legislative reforms:What exactly is a network service? Bill C-60would have provided a safe harbour forfirms providing services related to the oper-ation of the Internet or other digitalnetwork. A firm that provides digitalmemory in which another person stores awork or other subject-matter would havealso been protected. But would this havecovered YouTube? Should it have?

Yale law professor Yochai Benklerobserves that a networked rather thanindustrial information economy holds greatpractical promise: as a dimension of indi-vidual freedom; as a platform for betterdemocratic participation; as a medium tofoster a more critical and self-reflectiveculture; and as a mechanism to achieveimprovements in human developmenteverywhere.6

Lawrence Lessig treats this secondeconomy as distinct from and complemen-tary to the traditional one based on quid proquo transactions.7 Yet there seems to beincreasing convergence between the twoeconomies. Commercial entities are scram-bling to capitalize on the sharing economy.

Australian law is also different thanAmerican law, in that it too incorporates theconcept of authorization. Yet, despite thelegal differences, the Federal Court of Australia and the U.S. Supreme Courtreached roughly similar conclusions about

liability for indirect infringement in theKazaa and Grokster cases respectively.3

It does not follow, however, that aCanadian court would reach the same result.The leading Canadian case on liability forauthorizing infringement is CCH v. LSUC.4

In it the Chief Justice of Canada, writing for aunanimous Supreme Court, explicitly rejectedthe principles of Australian law upon whichthe Kazaa decision was based, saying: The[Australian] approach to authorization shiftsthe balance in copyright too far in favour ofthe owners rights and unnecessarily inter-feres with the proper use of copyrightedworks for the good of society as a whole. To

be held liable based on conventional principlesof Canadian copyright law the allegedauthorizer must sanction, countenance andapprove the infringement. And even if adefendant could be said to authorize usersactivities, courts must presume they do so onlyinsofar as it is in accordance with the law.

One way YouTubes users might actlegally is by making fair uses of copyright-protected content. In this respect, Canadianlaw is less forgiving than American law. Mostnotably, there is no clearly establishedparody defence in Canada. Nevertheless, thedistinction between fair use in the U.S. andfair dealing in Canada isnt particularlyimportant to the outcome of this case, giventhat much of the content on YouTube fallsoutside the scope of this defence. Yes, thereis ample non-infringing content, but there isalso much material that is clearly illegal.

Moreover, firms that actually host ortransmit copyright-infringing content aretreated differently from firms that merelycontribute to or induce infringement.Perhaps surprisingly, hosts and interme-diaries are less likely to be liable, due to theavailability of safe harbour provisions in the

Wu explains that if the internet were a red-lightdistrict, Napster, Kazaa and Grokster would bethe pimps while YouTube would be the Hotel.


16/36

TECHLAW //14

content. Some of the material available onsites such as YouTube is blatantly copyrightinfringing and directly competes with copy-right owners offerings on their websites, atdigital download retailers and through televi-sion broadcasts or DVD video recordings.Other material incorporates copyright-protected content into legitimate derivateworks, such as music or video mashups orsoundtracks added to home movies. And stillmore material is genuinely creative in thevery strictest sense of the word, as is the case

with many independent films, music videosor other works produced by professionals

and amateurs alike. Separating this spectrumof content is not an easy task.

It doesnt help matters that many ofthe firms operating in this environmentsuffer from a sort of schizophrenia. NewsCorporation owns MySpace. Viacom hasrelied on the same safe harbours that protectYouTube to operate its own video-sharingsites, iFilm and AtomFilms. Sony is trying toprotect its interests in music, film, televisionand video games, while at the same timeUniversal Music has sued Sony-owned

Grouper.com. Consumers have becomecreators, and consequently, intellectual

Two famous examples include the US$580million purchase of MySpace by NewsCorporation and Googles acquisition ofYouTube for US$1.65 billion. On a relatednote, an empirical study commissioned bythe European Union concluded that open-source software is worth 12 billion perannum to the European economy.8 Firms arerealizing that there are big bucks at stake andjumping aboard the bandwagon of peer-produced content.

The overlap of the commercial and sharing

economies has caused tensions. There is nobright line between pirated and peer-produced

An empirical study commissioned by the EuropeanUnion concluded that open-source software is worth

12 billion per annum to the European economy

7 Lawrence Lessig, On the Economies of Culture Lessig Blog (28 September 2006), online: Lessig Blog .8 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, Economic impact of open source software on innovation and the competitiveness of the Information and Communications Technology (ICT)

sector in the EU (20 November 2006), online: EUROPA European Commission .


17/36

be reached with conglomerates representingmultiple subsidiary labels, studios or networks.Another way to deal with such content mightbe collective blanket licensing, either on avoluntary or compulsory basis. Collectiveblanket licensing could also work well toenable the creation of a wide range of deriva-tive works. For many other creative works,individual creators might enter into expressagreements; though the host or provider willnormally stipulate take-it-or-leave-it licensing

terms through clickwrap contracts. In somecircumstances, Creative Commons or similarlicenses might be appropriate.

These strategies require concessions fromboth sides of the copyright debate. Rights-holders will be required to relax legal andtechnological control over their creationsand tolerate certain uses of their intellectualproperty. Distributors will have to accept thelegitimacy of copyright concerns and perhapspay for activities that should arguably be free.

These trade-offs among private partiesare, however, worth the price. In this way,creators of all sorts will experience increasedprofits, distributors and other intermediarieswill be able to build innovative businessmodels and society will benefit from a moredemocratic and participatory culture.

Perhaps most importantly, this strategyfor capitalizing on creative consumers in thetraditional economy will minimize collateraldamage upon those who wish to participatein the parallel sharing economy. And, in thelong term, the public interest will perhapsbe the greatest beneficiary of all. //

Professor Jeremy de Beer is a member of theLaw & Technology group. He teaches DigitalMusic, profiled elsewhere in this magazine. His

study of orphan works licensing at the Copy-right Board of Canada will be published soon.

Discouraging or resisting consumerscreativity can be ineffective and, in somecases, counterproductive. Even merelyencouraging consumer creativity, as opposedto enabling it, may leave revenue-generatingopportunities untapped.

Obviously, one of the primary challengesfirms face is to balance competing sentimentsand strategies. The typical tension is betweenthe publicity viral marketing provides and thecontrol needed to monetize momentum. One

of the advantages of most countries safeharbour provisions is that they allow copyrightowners some of the best of both worlds.Content owners can tolerate certain uses oftheir works while prohibiting others. Whenconsumers behaviour becomes cause fordiscomfort, copyright owners can complain.

Unfortunately, many firms find it difficultto take advantage of the flexibilities offeredunder safe harbour schemes. For largecorporate copyrights-holders, notificationsmight be ineffective. Though the specificallyidentified infringing work may be removed,another copy of the same work may reappearwithin days or hours. The giant game ofwhack-a-mole can be tedious and costly.

Recipients of such notifications mightalso find it onerous to comply with theirlegal obligations. Though automation mighthelp, where value judgments are appro-priate, automation can be highly problematic.Given the lack of judicial or quasi-judicialoversight, unsubstantiated notificationsmight result in the unwarranted removal ofnon-infringing content.

A better option, therefore, is to embracelicensing possibilities. Options include mega-deals between powerhouse players, voluntarycollective blanket licenses and initiatives like

the Creative Commons. For mainstreammusic, movies and television programs postedin their entirety, large-scale agreements might

9 Pierre R. Berthon et al., When Customers Get Clever: Managerial Approaches to Dealing with Creative Consumers (2007) 50 Business Horizons 39 at 44-45.

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 15

property rights-holders. Many professionalartists and producers endorse their fanssocial media networks. The networkedinformation economy involves a web ofoverlapping interests.

So what can the YouTube case teach usabout legal strategies for profiting frompeer-produced content in this complex envi-ronment? And by profit, I mean both directand indirect financial returns as well associal, cultural and democratic gains achiev-

able through systems of peer-production.The cutting-edge business literature

refers to several alternative market strategiesthat may be preferential to costly legalbattles. Authors of a recent study on mana-gerial approaches reveal that a firms attitudetoward consumer innovation can be eitherpositive or negative while its actions can beeither active or passive.9 Differentiating onthese two axes, the authors classify firmsinto four categories, depending on whetherthey discourage, resist, encourage or enablecreative consumers. Firms that discouragecreativity have a negative attitude, whichthey assert only passively. Resisting firms, bycontrast, share a negative attitude but takeactive steps to restrain consumer creativity.A positive attitude differentiates firms thatencourage or enable consumer creativity,but only enablers act overtly to facilitateconsumers behaviour.

The best business models involve coope-ration between incumbent copyrights-holders,innovative entrepreneurs and independentpeer producers. For instance, The BBC activelyenables consumer creativity through itsCreative Archive project. Bands like theBarenaked Ladies are also building success byembracing peer-production. They have

enabled fan remixes by selling the raw tracksbehind their recordings, encouraged fans tocapture and share concerts and released musicvideos incorporating social media celebrities.

There is no single strategy that suits allfirms dealing with peer-produced content.Nevertheless, the models being implementedby the likes of the Barenaked Ladies and theBBC offer significant and generally underap-preciated benefits to all stakeholders.

Bands like the Barenaked Ladies are also building success by

embracing peer-production. They have enabled fan remixes and

released music videos incorporating social media celebrities.

It doesnt help matters that many of the firms operating in this

environment suffer from a sort of schizophrenia. News Corporation

owns MySpace... The networked information economy involves

a web of overlapping interests.


18/36

TECHLAW //16

Four years ago, a team of around a dozenprivacy experts based at uOttawa and else-where received one of the largest-ever grantsfrom the Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council to study the impact ofidentification technologies on our identities,and on our ability to remain anonymous.

Directed by Ian Kerr, Canada ResearchChair in Ethics, Law and Technology, On theIdentity Trail (www.idtrail.org) has broughttogether researchers from North Americanand European academic, public, private,and not-for-profit sectors. With the goal ofdeveloping an interdisciplinary dialogueand getting academic results out in plain

language to policy makers and the broaderpublic, the team has undertaken threedifferent approaches to issues of privacy,anonymity and identity. The first is a socialscience and humanities perspective, thesecond addresses legal and policy questions,and the third explores the technologiesthemselves.

During the past four years, ID Trail hasquadrupled to more than 50 researchers,including a distingui shed array of aca -demics, practitioners and members ofpublic interest organizations, as well asdozens of graduate and undergraduatestudents from various disciplines anduniversities. Together, they have produceddozens of peer-reviewed academic articles,three special journal issues and a series ofonline educational resources for childrenand adults. They have also participated inmore than 100 presentations at numerousconferences and community events.

After four years of creative and ground-breaking research, funding for the projectwill come to an end in March, 2008. To cele-brate and disseminate some of theirremaining research outcomes, the membersof ID Trail hosted a major, multi-disciplinaryconference on October 26-27th, 2007 at theUniversity of Ottawa. This event, the thirdmajor conference of the project, was entitledThe Revealed I: A conference on privacyand identity. It featured speakers from acrossCanada, the United States and Europe andbrought together policy makers, academics,public interest and civil rights advocates,and technologists for a two day discussion

on the nature, value and place of anonymity,identity and authentication in our net -worked society.

TheRevealed I conference and a previousinternational workshop held in Bologna,Italy, were also the basis for a scholarlybook, Anonymity, Privacy and Identity in aNetworked Society: Lessons from theIdentity Trail, the first book published byOxford University Press to be licensed under aCreative Commons licence, allowing anybodyto share the content for non-commercialpurposes. This book follows The Contoursof Privacy (Cambridge Scholars Publishing)as the second book to be published by IDTrail, both making a global contribution tothe literature on privacy, surveillance, iden-tity and authentication.

The Revealed I conference was precededby a day long student conference, TheStudent I: A student conference on privacyand identity, on October 25th, 2007.Graduate and undergraduate students fromaround the world presented their own peer-reviewed research on project related themes.

Three students from ID Trail wereselected to present their work: CynthiaAoki, Jennifer Barrigar and Katie Black.Cynthias presentation investigated the legaland ethical implications of memory damp-ening drugs on identity, recently proposedby some as a form of therapy for post trau-matic distress disorder. Katies presentation

examined the implementation of CanadasNo-Fly List and its effects on privacy andbroader issues of social justice. Jenniferpresented on the use of reputation systemsin online dating environments and theirperpetuation of gendered inequality.

Even though the project itself will come toan end next March, all of the researchersassociated with the project will continue tocontribute their knowledge, expertise, andpassion in further understanding the impactof privacy, anonymity and identity on todaysnetworked society. //

on the IDENTITY TRAILheads towards home stretch Ian Kerr and Cynthia Aoki


19/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 17

Through the Law & Technology group, the University of OttawaFaculty of Law offers a unique LL.M. with a Concentration in Law &Technology. The Concentration offers specialized courses, practicalexperience and the opportunity to conduct innovative graduatelevel research in English and French. From its location in Canadas

technology capital, the program has been instrumental in producingtechnology law practitioners who now occupy all facets of the tech-nology law fields.

FacultyThe largest Canadian law faculty dedicated to technology law issues.

Learn from recognized national and international experts inthe innovative areas of: Copyright; Trademark; Patent; Internet Law;E-Commerce; Privacy; Open Source; Cyber-security; Cybercrime;Biotechnology, Information Ethics; Internet Governance; andSocial Justice.

Modules Curriculum: The curriculum includes two specialized grad-

uate seminars, Technopolicy and Technoprudence, aresearch paper or technology law project, internship, andelective courses from the areas of new media, intellectualproperty and e-commerce.

Internships:With leading Canadian law firms, technologycompanies, government policy departments or publicinterest groups.

Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic:Volunteer or intern at CIPPIC, Canadas foremost technology lawclinic.

University of Ottawa Law & Technology Journal:Volunteer or intern at the UOLTJ, an academic law reviewspecializing in law and technology jurisprudence.

International Conferences, Bi-weekly Speaker Series and

Special Lectures.

AdmissionIn order to be considered for admission to the Master of Lawsprogram, applicants must have an undergraduate law degree from aCanadian university with a satisfactory average or an equivalentforeign law degree with comparable results. For more informationplease contact the Faculty of Law Graduate Studies office:

Internet: http://www.llmlld.uottawa.ca/eng/master/admission.htmEmail: [email protected] Telephone: 613.562.5774Fax: 613.562.5341 //

CONCENTRATION INLAW & TECHNOLOGY

LL.M. EN DROITET TECHNOLOGIEPar lentremise du groupe de droit et technologie, la Facult de droitde lUniversit dOttawa offre un programme exclusif de matrise en

droit (LL.M.) avec concentration en droit et technologie. Cetteconcentration comporte des cours spcialiss, des expriencespratiques et la possibilit de raliser des recherches de deuximecycle novatrices, en anglais comme en franais. LUniversitdOttawa tant situe dans la capitale canadienne des technologies,ce programme joue un rle cl dans la formation de juristes spciali -ss en droit des technologies, qui exercent maintenant leurprofession dans toutes les sphres du droit des technologies.

Corps ProfessoralIl sagit du plus important corps professoral dans le domaine dudroit des technologies au Canada.

Vous aurez pour professeurs des spcialistes reconnus sur la scnenationale et internationale dans des domaines novateurs comme la

proprit littraire et artistique, les marques de commerce, lesbrevets, le droit de lInternet, le commerce lectronique, le droit lavie prive, la cyberscurit, la cybercriminalit, la dontologie delinformation, la gouvernance de lInternet et la justice sociale.

Modules Programme dtudes : Le programme comporte deux smi-

naires dtudes suprieures spcialiss, Techno-thorie etTechno-rgulation, un mmoire ou un projet de rechercheen droit des technologies, un stage, de mme que des coursau choix dans les domaines de la mdiatique, de la propritintellectuelle et du commerce lectronique.

Stages : auprs de cabinets juridiques dimportance,dentreprises spcialises dans la technologie, des servicesgouvernementaux dlaboration des politiques ou degroupes dintrt public.

Clinique dintrt public et de politique dInternet duCanada : bnvolat ou stage la CIPPIC, la cliniquejuridique canadienne de pointe en matire de droit destechnologies.

Revue de droit et technologie de lUniversit dOttawa :bnvolat ou stage la RDTUO, priodique spcialis endroit des technologies.

Colloques internationaux, srie de confrences bimensuelleset sminaires spciaux.

AdmissionPour tre admissibles au programme de matrise en droit, les candi-dats doivent dtenir un diplme de droit de premier cycle dune

universit canadienne, obtenu avec une moyenne satisfaisante, ouun diplme de droit quivalent, obtenu ltranger, moyennant desrsultats jugs comparables. Pour plus de renseignements, veuillezcommuniquer avec le bureau des tudes suprieures de la Facultde droit : adresse Internet :

http://www.llmlld.uottawa.ca/fra/maitrise/admission.htm/courriel : [email protected] tlphone : 613-562-5774tlcopieur : 613-562-5341 //


20/36

1. a robot may not injure a human being or,through inaction, allow a human beingto come to harm.

2. a robot must obey orders given to it by

human beings except where such orderswould conflict with the first law.

3. a robot must protect its own existence aslong as such protection does not conflictwith the first or second law.isaac asimov (runaround, 1941)

we are entering an age of advanced robotics and automation. by thetime that students enrolled in this course become established intheir legal careers, it is anticipated that robots will be our surgeonsand our domestic servants. other complex services once offered byhuman beings will be completely automated; these automatedsystems will become the proxy for human decision-making.

how do law and technology structure and constrain our possiblefuture worlds? what laws or ethical rules ought to govern a societyenmeshed in human-computer interaction? and how will thesevarious codes enable and disable the possibility of achieving what isgood, what is right and what is just?

the aim of this course is to interrogate these questions through anexploration of the state of the art of robot and automation technolo-gies and their introduction into society. we will consider the ethicaland legal significance of robots in the workplace, the market and athome. through a critique of existing and soon to be proposed ethicaland legislative frameworks, we will contemplate the interrelation-ship between ethics, law and technology by thinking about thegeneral goals of artificial intelligence, whether and how robots oughtto be programmed, how automated systems ought to resolveconflicting rules and norms, and about the broader social implica-tions of boarding this strange mothership. //

THE LAWS OF ROBOTICS,WITH PROFESSOR IAN KERR

1. un robot ne peut ni porter atteinte un trehumain ni, restant passif, laisser cet trehumain expos au danger.

2. un robot doit obir aux ordres donns par lestres humains, sauf si de tels ordres sont encontradiction avec la Premire Loi.

3. un robot doit protger son existence dans lamesure o cette protection nentre pas encontradiction avec la Premire ou laDeuxime Loi. isaac asimov (cercle vicieux,1941) (source : les robots, isaac asimov, ditions

jai lu, traduction de pierre billon, 1967)

nous entrons actuellement dans une re de robotique et dauto-matisation de pointe. nous prvoyons quau moment o lestudiants inscrits ce cours auront entrepris leur carrirejuridique, des robots nous serviront de chirurgiens et daidesdomestiques. dautres services complexes traditionnellementfournis par des humains seront entirement automatiss; cessystmes automatiss deviendront les intermdiaires des prisesde dcision des humains.

comment le droit et la technologie structurent-ils et limitent-ils nos univers futurs ventuels? quelles lois et quelles rglesthiques devraient rgir une socit o domine linteractionentre ltre humain et lordinateur? et comment ces codes diverspermettront-ils ou entraveront-ils la ralisation de ce qui estbon, de ce qui est bien et ce de qui est juste?

ce cours a pour objectif dexaminer ces questions par uneexploration de la robotique et des technologies dautoma-tisation de pointe, et de leur avnement dans la socit. nousnous pencherons sur le sens thique et juridique de la prsencede robots en milieu de travail, sur le march et la maison. par

une critique des cadres thiques et lgislatifs existants et en voiedtre proposs, nous considrerons les interrelations entrelthique, le droit et la technologie en analysant les objectifsgnraux de lintelligence artificielle, en se demandant si etcomment les robots devraient tre programms, en valuantcomment les systmes automatiss devraient rsoudre lescontradictions entre les rglements et les normes, et en sattar-dant aux implications sociales plus importantes que risquedengendrer ladoption de ce curieux mode de vie. //

LES LOIS DE LAROBOTIQUE, AVECLE PROFESSEURIAN KERR

TECHLAW //18


21/36

The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic(CIPPIC) was established in fall of 2003 at the University ofOttawa, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section. CIPPIC seeks toensure balance in policy and law-making processes on issuesthat arise as a result of new technologies. Upper year lawstudents work under the supervision of the Clinic director onprojects and cases involving the intersection of law, technologyand the public interest. CIPPIC Summer FellowshipProgram is now open to Canadian law students who havecompleted at least two years of law school. For more informa-tion and current news visit: http://www.cippic.ca //

La Clinique dintrt public et de politique dInternet duCanada a t mise en place la section de common law delUniversit dOttawa lautomne 2003. La CIPPIC sefforcedassurer un quilibre entre la politique et les processus lgis-latifs lis aux questions que soulvent les nouvelles technologies.Guids par la directrice gnrale de la CIPPIC, les tudiants etles tudiantes des cours suprieurs collaborent des projets etdes dossiers qui soulvent des questions lintersection dudroit, de la technologie et de lintrt public. Le programmedes bourses de recherche dt de la CIPPIC est maintenantoffert aux tudiants et tudiantes du Canada qui ont termin aumoins deux annes dtudes en droit. Pour obtenir plus derenseignements et des nouvelles rcentes, consultez le site Web :http://www.cippic.ca //

Digital Music,with ProfessorJeremy de Beerde Beers Digital Music course is a uniquemulti-national and multi-disciplinary surveyof the global digital music scene. Togetherthe class canvasses aspects of the law inCanada, the States, Europe, Australia,

Asia and Africa. As well as having across-continental scope, we analyzetimely issues through many differentlenses, by taking into account legal,commercial, technological andsocial perspectives. The overarchingobjective is to think broadly about thepolicies affecting the future of digitalmusic and, ultimately, the creation andconsumption of our own culture. //

Musique numrique, avec leprofesseur Jeremy de BeerLe cours Musique numrique du professeur de Beer comporte un tourdhorizon multinational et pluridisciplinaire de la scne mondiale en matirede musique numrique. Les tudiants examineront ensemble diversesfacettes de la loi au Canada, aux tats-Unis, en Europe, en Australie, en Asieet en Afrique. Tout en procdant une comparaison de ce qui se fait sur lesdiffrents continents, nous analysons des questions dactualit sous uncertain nombre de points de vue, en fonction de leurs aspects juridiques,commerciaux, technologiques et sociaux. Lobjectif gnral consiste susciter une rflexion densemble quant aux politiques qui auront des rper-cussions sur lavenir de la musique numrique et, consquemment, sur lacration et la consommation de notre propre culture. //

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 19

TECHNOLOGYLAW INTERNSHIPThe internship provides students with the opportunity to spend oneday per week in a technology law environment. Through readings,observation, and work assignments, students will gain insight intodaily practice and policy issues for lawyers working in the tech-nology law field. This popular course is available to bothundergraduate and graduate students as an elective course and

students are assigned a grade of satisfactory / non-satisfactory.The Technology Law Internship program has spanned four

cities Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, and Washington, DC. With morethan two dozen internship partners, students have the opportunityto intern at major law firms, business, governmental and non-governmental organizations, CIPPIC and the University of OttawaLaw & Technology Journal. //

STAGES EN DROITDES TECHNOLOGIESLe stage permet ltudiant ou ltudiante de passer une journepar semaine dans un milieu spcialis en droit des technologies etdacqurir ainsi, par le biais de lectures, dobservations et de tchesqui lui sont confies, une exprience de la pratique et des questionsde politiques auxquelles font face quotidiennement les juristesuvrant dans le domaine du droit des technologies. Ce coursoptionnel populaire est offert aux tudiants de premier cycle et auxtudes suprieures. La note attribue est exprime de la faon suiv-ante : satisfaisant/ non satisfaisant.

Le programme de stages en droit des technologies est ralisabledans quatre villes : Ottawa, Montral, Toronto et Washington, DC.Grce la collaboration de plus de vingt-quatre partenaires, ces stagespeuvent seffectuer auprs de grands cabinets, dentreprises, dorga-nismes gouvernementaux et non gouvernementaux, de la CIPPIC etde la Revue de droit et technologie de lUniversit dOttawa. //


22/36

TECHLAW //20

Il nest pas ncessaire de vous spcialiser en Droit et technologie pour suivre des cours de D& T. En fait, des cours comme Introduction la proprit intellectuelle sont recom-mands tout tudiant envisageant la pratique du droit. Toutefois, certains tudiants dubaccalaurat en droit suivent de nombreux cours en Droit et technologie et veulent se voirreconnatre officiellement cette spcialisation. La Facult de droit offre donc ces tudiantsl option en Droit et technologie .

Pour se voir reconnatre loption en Droit et technologie, les tudiants doivent obtenir18 crdits de cours dans ce domaine, dont le cours d Introduction la proprit intellectuelle ,de mme que lun de nos stages. Leur mmoire de recherche doit galement tre rdig dansle cadre de lun des cours de loption ou dun cours de recherche dirige.

Veuillez vous adresser au bureau des Affaires acadmiques pour obtenir la liste desexigences lies loption. Pour obtenir des renseignements complmentaires ou pour vousinscrire au L.L.B. avec option en Droit et technologie, veuillez vous adresser un respon-sable des Affaires acadmiques. //

You dont have to specialize in Law & Technology to take L&T courses in fact, courses likeIntroduction to Intellectual Property are recommended for any students planning to enter thepractice of law. But some LL.B. students take lots of Law & Technology courses and want toreceive formal recognition of their specialization. For these students, the Faculty of Law offersthe Option in Law & Technology.

To qualify for the Option in Law & Technology, students must complete 18 credits in thefield, including Intro to IP and one of our Internships. The Major Paper requirement mustalso be completed in either one of the Option courses or in a Directed Research course.

A list of requirements for the Option is available at the Academic Affairs office. To get moreinformation or to register for the LL.B. with Option in Law and Technology, please speak withan Academic Affairs officer. //

THE OPTION INLAW AND TECHNOLOGY

LOPTION EN DROITET TECHNOLOGIE


23/36

TECHLAW // 01/08 // v5.1 21


24/36

TECHLAW //22

ConfrencecommmorativeDeirdre G. Martin

en matire de droitrelatif au respect dela vie priveLe Groupe de Droit et technologie aura lhonneur de tenir, diciquelques semaines, la premire Confrence annuelle Deirdre G.Martin en matire de droit relatif au respect de la vie prive. Cetteconfrence verra le jour grce la gnrosit des collgues deDeirdre G. Martin, la division des affaires juridiques du Bureaudassurance du Canada.

Mme Martin (1978) est dcde le 21 juin 2006, des suites dunebrve maladie. Mre de trois enfants quelle affectionnait, avocateminente et passionne, fille et sur dvoue, amie attentive de

nombreuses personnes, elle a, par son dpart, cr un grand videchez tous ceux qui la ctoyaient. Ses confrres et consoeurs dtudesse souviennent avec nostalgie du charme contagieux de son sourire.

Mme Martin a occup le poste de conseillre juridique principaleau Bureau dassurance du Canada de 1998 2006. Elle uvraitcomme spcialiste de lapplication de la loi fdrale et des loisprovinciales de lAlberta et de la Colombie-Britannique en matirede protection de la vie prive et dassurance multirisque. Mme Martintait une confrencire doue qui prenait grand plaisir faire desprsentations sur la mise en uvre de ces lois. De 2001 2004, elle aanim, dans tout le Canada, des sminaires de formation auxquels ontparticip plus de deux mille personnes, employs de socits das-surance multirisque, courtiers indpendants et experts en sinistres.

Le groupe de Droit et technologie est trs heureux daccueilli rla professeure Anita L. Allen de la Facult de droit de lUniversit dePennsylvanie, qui prononcera cette premire Confrence comm-morative Deirdre G. Martin. La professeure Allen (galement connuesous le nom de Allen-Castellitto) est une minente spcialiste enmatire de droit relatif la protection de la vie prive et dthiquecontemporaine. Elle a rdig plusieurs ouvrages sur le droit protec-tion de la vie prive, dont Why Privacy Isnt Everything: FeministReflections on Personal Accountability.

La professeure Allen prononcera la Confrence commmorativeDeirdre G. Martin le 26 fvrier 2008. //

Deirdre G. MartinMemorial Lecturein Privacy LawThe Law & Technology Group is honoured to hostlater this year the first annual Deirdre G. MartinMemorial Lecture in Privacy Law. The Deirdre G.Martin Memorial Lecture was established thanksto the generosity of her colleagues at the InsuranceBureau of Canadas Legal Division.

Ms. Martin (78) passed away on June 21, 2006 after a short illness.She was a loving mother of three children, a passionate and excellentlawyer, a dedicated daughter and sister, and a caring friend tomany people, each of whom feels her loss deeply. Her law schoolfriends remember her charming and infectious smileit will besadly missed.

Ms. Martin was Senior Counsel with the Insurance Bureau ofCanada from 1998 until 2006. She was an expert on the application of

the federal, Alberta, and British Columbia privacy laws to the prop-erty and casualty insurance industry. Ms. Martin was a gifted speakerwho enjoyed making presentations on the implementation of theseprivacy laws. Between 2001 and 2004, she conducted training seminarsacross Canada to over two thousand people from P&C insurancecompanies, independent brokers, and claims adjusters.

The Law & Technology Group is thrilled that Professor Anita Allen ofthe University of Pennsylvania Law School will deliver the inauguralDeirdre Martin Memorial Lecture. Anita L. Allen (aka Allen-Castellitto)is a leading expert on privacy law and contemporary ethics. She isthe author of several books on privacy law including Why PrivacyIsnt Everything: Feminist Reflections on Personal Accountability.

Professor Allen will deliver the Deirdre G. Martin MemorialLecture on February 26, 2008. //

The Law&TechnologyStudent Society (LTSS)The Law & Technology Student Society (LTSS) is a University ofOttawa student-run organization for law students interested in lawand technology. The LTSS actively promotes technology law tostudents as an area of practice and provides opportunities forstudents to participate in law and technology related initiatives.http://www.ltss.ca //

lAssociation des tudiants/tudiantes en droit et technologielAssociation des tudiants/tudiantes en droit et technologie (AEDT)est une organisation gre par des tudiants et les tudiantessintressant au droit des technologies, lintention des tudiants dece domaine. LAEDT travaille activement promouvoir la pratiquedu droit des technologies et offrir la population tudiante desoccasions diverses de se renseigner en la matire. http://www.ltss.ca //


25/36


26/36

handling sensitive data such that it has beenlost or stolen.

So far the plaintiffs claims in negligencehave largely been unsuccessful, althoughreasonable arguments can be made both as amatter of negligence doctrine and public

policy that the courts should be more recep-tive to these claims in appropriate cases.Negligence law deals poorly with the

harms of the information age, failing inmany cases to recognize the harms that canbe done to and by information. The modernexplosion of identity theft is a function ofthe technologies of data storage andprocessing, which permit the retention oflarge amounts of data. It also flows from thefact that modern life involves a multitude oftransactions with strangers and so creates apervasive need for individual authentica-tion, which has largely been done usingpersonal information. We have a society that

is heavily dependent upon and personaldata and yet does not have sufficient mecha-nisms in place to ensure its safety.

The basic problems posed for plaintiffs innegligence claims for harms flowing forbreaches of data security can be summarizedas follows. First, where plaintiffs havebecome aware of a breach of data securitybut have not yet suffered identity fraud, thecourts have tended to find that no actualharm has been suffered. Since a negligenceclaim requires a showing of actual harm,

these plaintiffs fail. Plaintiffs in these caseshave raised the interesting analogy of theirsituation to those plaintiffs in the so-calledmedical monitoring cases in which peopleexposed to toxins with dangerous but latenteffects have sometimes succeeded in obtaining

the cost of ongoing medical monitoring. Thisargument has been rejected by the courts.This seems unfair since the plaintiffs arebeing advised by the govern ment and oftenby the institutions suffering the data securitybreaches to invest in credit-monitoring serv-ices or other forms of self protection. As aresult, careless data custodians are able toshift to the plaintiffs the costs of preventingthe identity fraud.

Where the plaintiffs do suffer identityfraud, they encounter other difficulties. Inparticular, the plaintiffs find it difficult toprove that the identity theft they suffered wascaused by a breach of security at the defen-

dant data custodian. Even where the identitytheft involved the specific informationknown to have been stolen from the defen-dant and occurred reasonably soon after thebreach of security, courts have refused to findcausation. The difficulty appears to be thatthe information used to commit identityfraud (such as names, addresses, credit cardnumbers, social insurance numbers) is oftenheld by numerous data custodians, any oneof whom may have mishandled it. In addi-tion, this data can also be stolen from the

individual him or herself through spyware orphishing websites. As a result, it is difficult totie the identity fraud to the poor secur itypractices of the defendant. Not all plaintiffshave been unsuccessful. In Bell v. MichiganCouncil 25,2 the plaintiffs successfully sued

the treasurer of their union for negligenthandling of their personal data. The trea-surers daughter was convicted of identityfraud after a notebook was found in herpossession listing the names, social securitynumbers and drivers licenses of the plaintiffsas well as the fraudulent purchases made intheir names. This case involved unusuallygood evidence of causation, and the plaintiffsin many other cases have found it difficultmuch more difficult to establish causation.

It is possible that some financial institu-tions may be able to assist plaintiffs, at leastwith respect to breaches in security atretailers rather than banks. Very quickly

after the public announcement of the TJXCompanies Inc. security breach, a bankingassociation began to announce publicly thatits member banks had linked fraudulentcredit card purchases to the securitybreach.3 This willingness to make publicstatements may reflect the banks growingunhappiness over having to bear the costs ofpreventive measures such as cancelingcompromised payment cards.

Even where plaintiffs are able to establishthat the data security breach caused the

TECHLAW //24

* Larticle de la pr

techlaw magazine

Documents