Ontario Court of Appeal Recognizes Tort of “Invasion of Seclusion”

In its recent ruling in Jones v Tsige, the Ontario Court of Appeal formally confirmed the existence of an actionable cause for invasion of seclusion. While the tort of appropriation of personality has long been recognized in Ontario, this appellate decision is the first in the province to give an unequivocal right of action based on breach of privacy. The court surveyed the relevant common law and statutory landscape in Ontario, other provinces, US, and Commonwealth, as well as Charter jurisprudence with respect to the protection of privacy rights. It concluded that “[r]ecognition of such a cause of action would amount to an incremental step that is consistent with the role of this court to develop the common law in a manner consistent with the changing needs of society”.

Read the rest of this entry »

Is SOPA Dead?

The story of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its sister act, Protect IP Act (PIPA) has been an intriguing and increasingly polarizing one. As Sarit wrote a few days ago, the increasing pressure from tech companies has forced the White House to come out against certain provisions, such as the DNS blocking provision in SOPA and other measures that would “tamper” with the underlying security measures of internet infrastructure. Read the rest of this entry »

SOPA and PIPA: The White House Changes Its Stance

The explosion in major names denouncing  SOPA and PIPA (including giants of the internet like Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and the Wikimedia foundation, who are all considering an unprecedented ‘blackout’ on January 18th) now has a new supporter in the name of the White House and the Obama administration.  Read the rest of this entry »

The Phone Book in Your Pocket

In an age where the phone book has nigh become obsolete, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has used it to analogize the federal government’s proposed lawful access legislation. His analogy was a response to serious privacy concerns over the proposed legislation, raised by the likes of Privacy Commissioners at both the federal and provincial levels. Lisa Austin, associate law professor at the University of Toronto, has responded in kind with an op-ed piece in the Globe and Mail. She looks at how this legislation will expand the government’s ability to get access to private internet data without judicial oversight. Are the privacy issues with our telephone usage really the same as the privacy issues with our internet use? Read Prof Austin’s article here.

Carrier IQ faces lawsuits over controversial tracking software

Last week, a furor was caused by software developer Carrier IQ, who develop software used to track mobile phone usage in diagnostic and network monitoring purposes. A researcher, Trevor Eckhart, reverse-engineered his HTC Evo Android phone and found that Carrier IQ’s software tracked his keystrokes, search queries and text messages with no ability to turn it off. He posted his results in a YouTube video showing ostensibly how his information was recorded and transmitted to carriers in the background on his phone. The video attracted massive attention, gathering 1.5 million hits in a week, and evoked a cease-and-desist letter from Carrier IQ’s legal team which they subsequently withdrew and apologized for after the Electronic Frontier Foundation stepped in.

Read the rest of this entry »

The End of the Internet?

Tension between the interests of copyright holders and the accessibility and openness of the Internet is not a new phenomenon – Napster anyone? However, a potentially game-changing new development in online intellectual property and copyright law is currently making its way through the United Stages legislature. The Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in October of this year. The Act was given hearing in front of the House Judiciary Committee on November 16, 2011; its counterpart in the Senate, the PROTECT-IP Act, was introduced in May of this year and has since been passed. Read the rest of this entry »

Who Gets Burned When the Dragon Stirs? – Ramifications of Stricter Patent Protection in China

Jameson Berkow in The National Post recently voiced a concern not unfamiliar to those who have seen the cover of any Economist magazine in the past eight years – the dangers of China’s evolving economy, in particular their approach to patent protection.

The article argues that, “China … has intentionally maintained a lax intellectual property enforcement regime for decades, waiting until its internal invention industry had become strong enough to warrant something more robust.” Read the rest of this entry »

Apple Manages to Frustrates Developers…Again!

Apple has launched a new requirement, which will require sandboxing of all Mac App Store applications, starting next March. This move again will frustrate developers, although Apple claims its main motivation for such a move is to provide safety. Apple has had a unique relationship with many app developers in the past, providing a superb launch point and audience for their products, but also frustrating them with restrictive and sometimes anti-competitive strategies. Read the rest of this entry »

Microsoft Defends Patent-Licensing Strategy

Amidst the flurry of patent cases among the lot of mobile technology companies, it is difficult to keep track of who is bringing whom to court. In light of the sheer number of cases and their ever growing international scope, even the use of flow charts cannot fully rescue our collectively boggled minds from the convoluted and fast evolving relationships of these entities. On this basis alone, many would say that without a serious overhaul, the patent system risks completely stymieing its objective of fostering innovation – at least in the mobile business where companies appear more preoccupied by legal disputes than research and development.

According to Microsoft Deputy General Counsel Horacio Gutiérrez, however, such legal wrangling is an expected consequence following the introduction of any new and disruptive technology. Read the rest of this entry »

SCC Judgement: Hyperlinking to Content Does Not Constitute Republication

Last Wednesday (October 19th, 2011), the Supreme Court of Canada released its judgement on Crookes v. Newton (2011 SCC 47). The case focused on whether or not liability existed when one post hyperlinks to allegedly defamatory material on the internet. The court’s decision was succinctly summarized by Justice Abella, who stated, “I would conclude that a hyperlink, by itself, should never be seen as “publication” of the content to which it refers.”  Read the rest of this entry »