There are several reports saying that the US government has been logging domestic phone calls and creating a database of trillions of calls.

The reason given is for post 9/11 terrorism.

I find this kind of thing troubling from a privacy perspective. Far too often governments do this sort of information collection, perhaps illegally, or propose new laws to allow them more intrusive powers.

It is usually justified by saying it is to protect against terrorism, child porn, or some other purpose that is hard to argue against.

If one questions the approach, you are often accused of being part of the problem, or not backing the cause. The real issue is whether the steps being taken are effective at all, let alone whether the intrusion justifies the results, or whether there are other ways to get the job done.

Another troubling undercurrent is the “trust us, we’re the government” argument. I’ve never figured out why any particular government should feel they can deal with information and privacy issues, but other governments or corporations can’t. Or indeed why some governments feel they are above the law. If they won’t abide by the law when collecting this stuff, how can we have any confidence that they will abide by the law when it comes to protecting the info, or dealing with its inncocent citizens?

We all need to step back and look at these issues from a rational, logical approach.

Read a Wired article

Read a Washington Post article

Sir Terry Matthews, founder of companies including Mitel, Newbridge Networks, and March networks, spoke at the London TechAlliance annual meeting yesterday.

Two of the messages he left with us were to be persistent, and to make your customers and employees feel involved.

Read a London Free Press article about his talk

Look at TechAlliance’s “BiWeekly Connections” comments

In a post entitled Recording Industry Now Okay With Letting You Listen To Your CDs On Your iPod – from the how-kind-of-them dept, Techdirt says the recording industry has asked the UK government to change the law to make it legal to rip a CD to play it on other devices.

Read the post to see how bizarre this really is.

Read the Techdirt post

The British judge found that Apple iTunes use of their Apple logo does not violate the rights of the Apple Corp logo.

See an explanation on CNet

See an earlier post of mine

David Canton – for the London Free Press – May 6, 2006

Read this on Canoe

Technology has made the movement of information across borders quick and easy.

It has led to concerns, however, as governments increasingly want to look at data.

Ottawa responded to this in the recently released Report on Assessment of Privacy Concerns Related to the U.S. Patriot Act. Released with it was a multipart federal strategy titled Privacy Matters: the Federal Strategy to Address Concerns About the USA Patriot Act and Transborder Data Flows.

This matter affects all Canadians, as it is common for businesses and institutions to hire service providers outside Canada to manipulate data.

One example is the processing of credit card transactions. In many cases, it’s not practical or economical to keep all the information in Canada.

Once outside Canada, information may become subject to the laws of a foreign government.

Information stored or accessible in the U.S., for example, may be subject to its Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism legislation passed shortly after Sept. 11, 2001.

The act allows U.S. law enforcement officials to access information about individuals without their knowledge.

This includes access to personal information about Canadians — if the information is stored in, or accessible from, the U.S. This is a troubling proposition to many Canadians.

The federal strategy revolves around three main factors.

* Protecting privacy is a shared responsibility between the federal government, the provincial governments and the private sector.

* Privacy rights must be balanced with other important interests, including international trade, public safety and national security.

* New strategies should build on existing legislation.

The first step started with the government raising awareness within its departments about the privacy issues generated by the U.S. Patriot Act. They were required to evaluate the risks created by their outsourcing practices and minimize the risks.

A number of followup initiatives are to take place in the short and long term, including an assessment of federal contracting activities, ongoing contract advice and implementation of risk management strategies for contracting where information may be at risk under the U.S. Patriot Act or other foreign laws.

Although the strategy developed by the federal government does not eliminate the potential for the U.S. Patriot Act and other foreign legislation to be utilized to access private information about Canadian citizens, it’s a step toward protecting the privacy interests of Canadians in an ever-changing world.

Rob Hyndman had a post yesterday that said: I’m so impressed with the artistry of this disclaimer that I may just have to find a way to work it into the technology contracts I draft.

Rob linked to an amusing but clear rock climbing disclaimer.

I took that as a challenge, and offer below an amended version for technology contracts. I’m sure it can be improved upon (this calls for a wiki).

Read Rob’s post and the rock climbing disclaimer

WARNING
Business is unpredictable and unsafe. The Internet is dangerous. Many blogs have been written about these dangers, and there’s no way we can list them all here. Read the blogs.

The Internet is covered in slippery slopes with loose, slippery and unpredictable footing. The RIAA can make matters worse. Patent trolls are everywhere. You may fall, be spammed or suffer a DOS attack. There are hidden viruses and worms. You could break your computer. There is wild code, which may be vicious, poisonous or carriers of dread malware. These include viruses and worms. E-mail can be poisonous as well. We don’t do anything to protect you from any of this. We do not inspect, supervise or maintain the Internet, blogsphere, ISP’s or other features, natural or otherwise.

Real dangers are present even on the Web. E-commerce is not the mall. It can be, and is, steep, slippery and dangerous. Web features made or enhanced by humans, such as firewalls and spam filters (if any) can break, collapse, or otherwise fail catastrophically at any time. We don’t promise to inspect, supervise or maintain them in any way. They may be negligently constructed or repaired. The web is unsafe, period. Live with it or stay away.

Stay on trusted sites whenever possible. The terrain, in addition to being dangerous, is surprisingly complex. You may get lost. Carry food, water and an APU at all times.

Ads for things you don’t want and other objectionable content can arrive from nowhere. This can happen naturally, or be caused by people around you that are being used as bots. Spam and disgusting images of all sizes, including huge images, can arrive, or pop-up with no warning. Use of spam filters is advised for anyone approaching the Internet. They can be purchased or rented from us. They won’t save you if you get hit by something big or on a port you left open. A whole DOS attack might collapse on you and squash you like a bug. Don’t think it can’t happen.

Public opinion can be dangerous, regardless of the forecast. Be prepared with extra damage control, including press releases. Ticking off the blogsphere can kill you. The Streisand effect can turn a simple nastygram into a deathtrap.

If you make hasty comments about those in high places (making unsupported comments that reduce the image of a person, often posted quickly and without thinking) without proper thought and, or allow your employees to do so, you are making a terrible mistake. Even if you know what you’re doing, lots of things can go wrong and you may be sued for libel. It happens all the time.

We do not provide rangers or security personnel. The other people on the web, including other visitors, our employees, agents, and guests, and anyone else who might sneak in, may be stupid, reckless, or otherwise dangerous. They may be mentally ill, criminally insane, drunk, using illegal drugs and/or armed with deadly malware and ready to use them. We aren’t necessarily going to do anything about it. We refuse to take responsibility.

If you surf at work, you may become pre-occupied with it. This is true whether you are experienced or not, trained or not, equipped or not, though training and equipment may help. It’s a fact, surfing at work is extremely dangerous. If you don’t like it, surf at home. You really shouldn’t be doing it anyway. We do not provide supervision or instruction. We are not responsible for, and do not track how much time you surf at work (although we could if we wanted to.) As far as we know, your employer may find out and send you plunging to unemployment. There are countless tons of loose management staff ready to be dislodged and fall on you or someone else. There are any number of extremely and unusually dangerous conditions existing on and around the Web, and elsewhere on the Internet. We may or may not know about any specific hazard, but even if we do, don’t expect us to try to warn you. You’re on your own.

Rescue services are not provided by us, and may not be available quickly or at all. Local computer geeks may not be equipped for or trained in hard drive recovery. If you are lucky enough to have somebody try to get rid of a virus or find that deleted file, they may be incompetent or worse. This includes your local computer store. We assume no responsibility. Also, if you decide to participate in a rescue of some other unfortunate, that’s your choice. Don’t do it unless you are willing to assume all risks.

By entering our site, you are agreeing that we owe you no duty of care or any other duty. We promise you nothing. We do not and will not even try to keep the premises safe for any purpose. The premises are not safe for any purpose. This is no joke. We won’t even try to warn you about any dangerous or hazardous condition, whether we know about it or not. If we do decide to warn you about something, that doesn’t mean we will try to warn you about anything else. If we do make an effort to fix an unsafe condition, we may not try to correct any others, and we may make matters worse! We and our employees or agents may do things that are unwise and dangerous. Sorry, we’re not responsible. We may give you bad advice. Don’t listen to us. In short, ENTER AND USE THIS SITE AT YOUR OWN RISK. And have fun!

David Fraser’s Canadian Privacy Law Blog refers to an article that described how much information could be found just by starting with a discarded boarding pass. It was more than sufficient to enable fraud or identity theft.

It illustrates the importance of shredding or otherwise destroying any piece of paper that has any information at all about yourself.

And don’t assume that just because your name isn’t on it, you are safe. Its far too easy to combine or use other information to trace it back.

Read David’s post

The first trade-marks or branding that many people think of are descriptive of their product or service.

For the most part, thats a bad idea.

From a legal perspective, one can’t have a trade-mark that is “…clearly descriptive… of the character or quality of the wares or services…”. (Section 12(1)(b) of the Trade-marks Act.)

If a trade-mark is descriptive, it is considered “weak”, in that it does not do a good job of distinguishing that company’s wares or services from similar wares and services of competitors.

The right approach is to have trade-marks that people easily remember, not ones that describe your product – or your competitors product.

An example of a memorable trade-mark is Nerds on Site for computer services.

Read a Trade-marks Guide with info about the care and feeding of trade-marks

I keep harping on how important Net Neutrality is. I’m not one that suggests “there should be a law about that” very often (as odd as that may seem coming from a lawyer), but I believe this concept is fundamental to the future of the Internet.

Take a look at the YouTube video on the Public Knowledge site (via Digg) that explains what the concept is about. Its worth spending the 3 minutes.

Look at the Public Knowledge video

See the Digg post

David Canton – for the London Free Press – April 29, 2006

Read this on Canoe

When Sony introduced the Playstation Portable (PSP) in Canada in 2005, it also launched the Universal Media Disc (UMD).

Sony began releasing movies on these alongside videogames to be played on the PSP. However, its proprietary format appears to have contributed to its demise.

Early movie releases were a success, but those quickly tapered off. Several studios, including Sony Home Pictures Entertainment, announced they were cutting back on movie releases for the PSP due to disappointing sales.

The UMD’s proprietary format is one reason for this market failure. Sony took this approach partly to prevent pirating of its games and movies for use on the PSP. Sony was also attempting to corner the market on portable video games and movies.

Sony designed the product so the consumer would have to keep buying from Sony and UMDs would only work in Sony devices. This approach is known as vendor lock-in.

Consumers always have had a problem with proprietary formats. The alternative is open standards or a format available to the public to use and implement.

Others may create it at either no cost or a small fee to the format owner. Any manufacturer can build products that work with the format and the resulting competition leads to greater diversity and pricing for the consumer.

It used to be common for software products to store information in their own unique format.

However, if information is stored in a format that is proprietary to the manufacturer, it becomes a concern. You may have no way of retrieving your information without using the protected software. The software manufacturer has practical control of your data and you are locked in to buying future releases of the software.

If the manufacturer ceases to manufacture the software, you may no longer be able to access your information.

A recent report of the Committee for Economic Development entitled Open Standards, Open Source and Open Innovation: Harnessing the Benefits of Openness (www.ced.org) finds openness in the creation of digital products is an important element in fostering innovation and economic growth.

The World Bank recently urged countries to move toward open-information technology to accelerate economic growth, efficiency and innovation. Many countries and state governments are taking steps to rely less on proprietary formats and moving toward free, open-source formats.

In other words, it is best to compete on features, price, branding, support and other things consumers or business value — not by using technology to force the buyer to deal with you.