Canadian Privacy Act 398
Nos. writes "Yesterday, I happened upon an Act that came into effect in Canada on January 1, 2004. The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act protects almost every bit of personal information not publicly available. For example, your name, race, date of birth, income, etc. are protected where your address and telephone number are not (these are generally available in the telephone book). Some of the more interesting parts of the faq include such wonderful things as: '[businesses must] supply you with a product or a service even if you refuse consent for the collection, use or disclosure of your personal information unless the information is essential to the transaction'. Definitely a step in the right direction."
Serious (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Privacy = Myth (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Privacy = Myth (Score:3, Insightful)
I was reviewing my companies out going email the other day and apparently our CFO sends himself financial spreadsheets through email with no encryption, security, etc. Crazy.
Some people will blow it on HIPAA but many others are running around like crazy trying to be in compliance- as they are afraid of getting slammed. (We work with hospitals doing collections). Interesting stuff.
Great in theory... (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole war on spam is the exact same thing. The government passes all of these laws to make it look like they're doing something but then can't/won't enforce said laws.
They can pass all the laws they want but if the government is unwilling to enforce them then what's the point?
Businesses MUST (Score:2, Insightful)
I already have your product and it doesn't seem to be working correctly. I DON'T WANT YOUR SURVEYS OR MARKETING CRAP. I want support and it seems that I call the wrong number every single time.
Re:Toothless? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Car Dealerships... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not retroactive? (Score:5, Insightful)
It just demonstrates how strongly America loves its businesses and corporations (and subsequently, its money). These corporate/business-friendly policies that put so much pressure on American employees are just like outsourcing in that they alienate the apparently "not-worthwhile" American employee. While America may keep their corporations and their corporate revenue, they might lose a comparable amount in salaries and income taxes. Perhaps.
I like these progressive-non-Big-Brother (i.e. not China, Saudi Arabia, evidently) countries that respect the people and their lives rather than corporations.
You do raise a good point about govenment monitoring and the like. It does seem like small consolation to have your privacy rights from your employer, but still allow the government to monitor every aspect of your existence.
Still, this is a good thing.
Canada, beautiful Canada (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously though, I have done allot of thinking about the difference between Americans and Canadians lately and I believe that the best way of explaining it is by looking at American idol and comparing it to CBC's Monday Report. Americans like to laugh at themselves and Canadians like to laugh at their politicians.
Re:Your name? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not in Canada. Here you have to pay a surcharge to be unlisted from the phone book.
I suppose it doesn't mean it's impossible, but at least now the service will be completely free.
Speaking of that, the idiots at Bell will probably finally be forced to list my fax number properly (well, they did that out of courtesy and confusion a while ago anyways, but that's another story).
Inaccurate Blub (Score:3, Insightful)
When I took an IT law course in 1999 we talked about PIPEDA and it came into effect in stages starting in 2000, first affecting government, then banks, then large companies, and so on until it applies to all companies.
Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
Re:why all the disbelief? (Score:2, Insightful)
For example, who was the first woman in space? Any true American will tell you that it was Sally Ride, whereas those crazies on the rest of the planet will say it was Valentina Tereshkova, in 1963.
Re:and Canada is a socialist state? (Score:1, Insightful)
One day I'd like to see a list of countries that Americans do not consider socialist.
But, putting that aside, what on earth does privacy protection have to do with not being socialist??? Sweden, considered by most Americans to be practically communist, has some of the most strict personal privacy laws in the world!
Re:and Canada is a socialist state? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the argument usually comes down to taxation rates. I've lived and worked in both the U.S. and Canada. All I know is, I payed whackloads less on employee stock options that I exercized in Canada than I did in the U.S. Sure in some states (not all!) the income tax rate is lower than in Canada, but in the states stock option gains were taxable as regular income, which in canada only 50% of the gains were taxable as regular income. I'd take half of 43% over 35% tax any day...
Most importantly, though how can you call Canada socialist, totalitarian or big brother in relationship to the States when it comes to the government involvement in your lives below the 49th? Man I don't need some cop telling me I can't j-walk across the f'ing street when I want to. And how the heck can you have a reasonable folk music festival (e.g. Seattle's) with cops crawling over the place nicking anyone with Mary Jane?
I think the U.S. was the leader in establishing the free democratic state a couple of centuries ago, but I'd have to say the torch has been passed on. Not exclusively to Canada, but to a group of western countries that have taken the idea of personal freedom and run with it.
Re:Car Dealerships... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, we are socialist. (Score:4, Insightful)
yes, this is correct. Canada, like most countries with high standards of living (like most of Europe) is Socialist. As a Canadian, I'm quite proud of this.
This seems to be the counterproof.
No, this is exactly proof. This is what Socialist governments do - they enact laws that benefit people instead of ones that benefit corporations.
Americans seem to equate 'socialism' with 'totalitarianism', when the two have exactly zero in common. Perhaps if you understood what the terms actually mean, you wouldn't be so confused.
Re:So it happens... (Score:2, Insightful)
get the facts right (Score:4, Insightful)
Specifically, the federal Privacy Act came into effect July 1, 1983, the federal PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act) came into effect January 1, 2001, and the BC provincial PIPA (Personal Information Privacy Act) came into effect January 1, 2004. What it is important is that "[a]s of January 1, 2004, the [Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents] Act will cover the collection, use or disclosure of personal information in the course of any commercial activity within a province, including provincially regulated organizations. The federal government may exempt organizations or activities in provinces that have their own privacy laws if they are substantially similar to the federal law." PIPEDA has been in place for a few years now, it just got extended to corporatations; BC now has their own overriding legislation as well.
See here for more details:
http://www.privcom.gc.ca/fs-fi/02_05_d_
I also thought your post was a horrible summary of the various pieces of legislation and their consequences, but that's just my opinion. I'd suggest next time using the official government propoganda. Even your first sentence managed to probably be incorrect--PIPA (and probably PIPEDA, I'm not sure) does protect your personal information that is public as well, in terms of reasonable use (i.e. I believe telemarketers aren't allowed to go through the telephone directory).
Regards,
Casper
Re:Toothless? (Score:4, Insightful)
If however you would like to use someone else's money to buy your house then they are obviously going to want to know whether you are a good risk or not and are going to check your credit history to determine this.
Re:Canada - Land of Restricted Speech (Score:2, Insightful)
I know this is Slashdot, but RTFA, dumbass!
Negligent (Score:3, Insightful)
Steal the card, call from any phone, activate it.
They don't authenticate in ANY way that I'm aware of.
I'm a Canadian video store clerk.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, granted, I work at a chain store, so this varies from store to store in terms of membership requirements policies. I guess the policy is the same, but the neighbourhood determines how it's enforced(at the store in the richest neighbourhood in Canada, you just plain don't ever check a person's picture ID. It's always just by phone number. Interestingly, this is also where nobody blinks if they've racked up $100 in late charges). At my store, the requirements are a driver's license(some sort of picture ID), a credit card(we perform a $2.00 pre-authorization, which holds $2.00 for three days, then gives it back to make sure it's valid and active -- and yes, we have had instances with invalid credit cards), and if they don't have a credit card, then they need two additional pieces of government issued ID besides the driver's license. (SIN if they offer it, birth certificate, citizenship, health card...) Some stores that I've seen don't even use membership forms, which blows my mind...I mean, doesn't that mean that they haven't signed anything and technically don't have to bring anything back? I guess it hasn't come up yet.
Vast majority of people are ok with this. But I hate the arguers. I've thought about it myself, and I've made up my mind(for what it's worth) on why we need all this stuff -- and made sure it's valid: As a rental store, we're trusting you to bring our stuff back. If you don't, we still need it back, and we need to be able to find you to get our stuff back.
I had to deny rentals to a customer today because her phone number was not in service(we found out when we tried to call her on the late list to remind her her stuff was overdue). She gave the same phone number, I tried it again, and it still said not in service. So I said I couldn't rent to her without a working phone number, and she left.
Sometimes it seems harsh, but given the outrageous customer stuff that happens...I still can understand why the rules are there. It is an all-too-regular thing for people to come in to different stores(some with more lenient rental membership policies), rent 3-5 games, and go rent more games from three more stores, never to be heard from again. $70 game for $7. Not a bad deal. I wouldn't be surprised if we start making it a blanket policy to check the phone number at till every single time we sign up a new member.