This month’s Wired magazine has a thought provoking article about how emerging technologies dealing with our minds will create new privacy and ethical issues. It asks the question: do we have a right to mental privacy?

The article states: We think of our brains as the ultimate private sanctuary, a zone where other people can’t intrude without our knowledge or permission. But its boundaries are gradually eroding.

Examples include brain scans that can provide insight into our thoughts, and the ability to alter brain function or send messages to our brains. There is a drug that can help erase traumatic memories – should the state be able to prevent one from taking it because they need your memory to prosecute the criminal that caused that memory?

Read the Wired article

For the London Free Press – April 7, 2008

Read this on Canoe

A new website has been created to fill in the gaps in the upcoming do-not-call telephone number registry.

Canadians can register at ioptout.ca, choose the entities from which they don’t want to receive unsolicited marketing telephone calls and the website automatically informs those entities via e-mail.

I recently wrote about the gaps in the Canadian do-not-call registry that is to be in place this fall. It lets you put your phone number on a list, which telemarketers are not to call.

It has been criticized because there is a long list of exempted entities to which the do-not-call registry does not apply.

Those exempted from the registry include registered charities, political parties, those collecting information for a survey, solicitors of subscriptions for general-circulation newspapers and businesses with an existing business relationship with the consumer.

To fill this gap, University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, a critic of the exemptions in the do-not-call legislation, created ioptout.ca.

Early indications are the site will be popular, as thousands of people signed up within the first couple of days.

So why would an organization that receives an e-mail from this site pay attention to it?

Privacy legislation makes it clear that organizations can only use personal information — such as a phone number — for the uses to which the individual consents.

If you specifically tell an organization they are not to use your phone number to solicit from you, it’s a violation of privacy legislation to continue to do so.

If an organization continues to call individuals who have told them not to call, individuals can complain to the federal Privacy Commissioner, or their provincial Privacy Commissioner in provinces that have their own private-sector privacy legislation.

The site has a long list of entities to choose from, and promises to expand the list. Users can contact ioptout to suggest new entities to add by e-mail, or through its wiki — software that allows users to collaboratively create, edit, link, and organize the content of a website.

You also can sign up to receive a monthly e-mail update advising of new entities that have been added to the potential opt-out list.

If individuals are concerned their information is being stored by the ioptout site, they have the option of deleting their registration information from the site after the site sends out the e-mails to their selected entities.

So, if you want to cut down on those annoying phone calls asking for money or trying to sell you products, sign up at iopout.ca now, and on the do-not-call registry this fall when it becomes live.

TechAlliance’s IT Week wrapped up last night with a community mixer. All the events were well attended. Two things stand out in my mind.

First, London IT companies are doing a much better job of letting the community know about them. It is becoming more of a community than a group of islands, which bodes well for the future of London’s IT sector.

Second, there was some excellent discussion dealing with common issues such as human resources and the promotion of London’s IT sector outside of London. TechAlliance (including its IT advisory council which I am on) will make good use of that feedback.

On a related note, London’s Digital Extremes is to be congratulated on their release of their latest game – Dark Sector – for the XBox and PS3. Their launch party was held last night. The game has been well received by reviewers – early indications are that sales will be brisk.

1. Take some behavior/activity that most would agree is wrong (aka the “evil”)

2. Someone says “we need a law to stop the evil”.

3. Someone drafts a law with no rational thought or research into:

(a) whether it will actually stop/diminish/fix the evil; or,
(b) what collateral damage it will cause.

4. Lawmakers/supporters get on the bandwagon thinking that:

(a) it’s a good cause (see # 1); and/or
(b) it makes a good sound bite (see # 2); and/or
(c) it might impress voters/lobby groups (see # 1 and 2):
with no independent thought, or uncaring disregard, as to its effects (see # 3).

5. People won’t say no to the proposed law because they are afraid of being seen as in favor of the evil.

We need to stop doing this. Too many ineffective/obtrusive/unenforceable laws are passed as a result of this recipe.

So what caused this rant?

An Ontario private members bill has been proposed to require everyone to report any suspected child pornography. While no rational person would support child pornography, the above recipe is being followed. There is apparently much support for the proposed bill within the legislature. Commentary on a legal list serve is virtually unanimous in its condemnation of the bill because the only likely effect will be to cause collateral damage.

David Fraser talks about an unpublished case that said evidence obtained about a subscriber without a warrant from an Internet Service Provider is unlawfully obtained.

As David points out, it is unclear under PIPEDA whether a warrant is required for an ISP to release that kind of information, or whether a letter worded to address the criteria in section 7(3) is sufficient.

Apparently this decision is under appeal – it bears watching.

For more detail, read David’s post in his Canadian Privacy Law Blog