The Canadian Privacy Law Blog: Developments in privacy law and writings of a Canadian privacy lawyer, containing information related to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (aka PIPEDA) and other Canadian and international laws.

Search this blog

Recent Posts

On Twitter

About this page and the author

The author of this blog, David T.S. Fraser, is a Canadian privacy lawyer who practices with the firm of McInnes Cooper. He is the author of the Physicians' Privacy Manual. He has a national and international practice advising corporations and individuals on matters related to Canadian privacy laws.

For full contact information and a brief bio, please see David's profile.

Please note that I am only able to provide legal advice to clients. I am not able to provide free legal advice. Any unsolicited information sent to David Fraser cannot be considered to be solicitor-client privileged.

David Fraser's Facebook profile

Privacy Calendar



Subscribe with Bloglines

RSS Atom Feed

RSS FEED for this site

Subscribe to this Blog as a Yahoo! Group/Mailing List
Powered by

Subscribe with Bloglines
Add to Technorati Favorites!

Blogs I Follow

Small Print

The views expressed herein are solely the author's and should not be attributed to his employer or clients. Any postings on legal issues are provided as a public service, and do not constitute solicitation or provision of legal advice. The author makes no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained herein or linked to. Nothing herein should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent counsel.

This web site is presented for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and do not create a solicitor-client relationship between you and David T.S. Fraser. If you are seeking specific advice related to Canadian privacy law or PIPEDA, contact the author, David T.S. Fraser.

Sunday, September 04, 2005

California RFID bill born again 

The Library Law Blog is reporting that the controvertial California RFID bill (SB 768: Identity Information Protection Act of 2005) is back on the legislative agenda after being shelved: LibraryLaw Blog: Breaking News - California RFID bill born again.

Previous posting: The Canadian Privacy Law Blog: San Fran Chronicle wants RFID privacy bill back on the agenda.

Labels: ,

9/04/2005 08:13:00 AM  :: (2 comments)  ::  Backlinks

There are strong indications that SB 768 (formerly SB 682) was gutted and amended for cosmetic reasons and that the bill is quite dead.

The California Appropriations Committee decided to hold SB 682, thereby killing it for the remander of this year. However, the members of that committee as well as the committee chairperson - sitting as ordinary Assemblypersons during a floor vote - voted to allow Senator Simitian to amend SB 768 in order to replace all of its content with the contets of SB 682 - the very bill that the Appropriations Committee voted to kill.

This glaring contradiction begs for an explaination, and an explaination is readily apparent: it was done to allow Senator Simitian to "save face."

Rumor has it that Simitian pledged the sponsors of the bill (the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation) that he would get SB 682 to the Assembly floor. And that's what this seemingly bizarre amendment allowed to happen. This seemingly hollow achievement allows Simitian to satisfy his political allies with a Pyrrhic victory and the illusion of overcoming overwhelming political force. But it is likely that somewhere a high level deal was made to allow Simitian to save face with the promise that the bill would never hit the floor for a vote.

However, like baseball, any partcular game of lawmaking is never over until it is over. When bills are "gutted and amended" in this fashion and for these reasons, the bill is customarily placed in the Inactive File. SB 768 is still in the Active File, which means anything can happen prior to the legislature adjouring at the end of the week.

Stay tuned.
Final Update for 2005:

As I reported above, Califoria Sentate Bill 768 was gutted and it's language replaced with the contents of SB 682. Although it is likely that this maneuver was permitted in order to allow the bill's author, State Senator Simitian, to save face, the bill remained in the Assembly Active File, which meant that it could still be voted upon.

Well, it didn't happen. On September 8th the bill was placed in the Inactive File and then both houses of the California Legislature adjourned for the year.

This means that both SB 768 and its identical counterpart SB 682 will possibly come up for further action sometime after January 1, 2006. This further means that if either bill actually gets out of the Assembly and then out of the Senate (they have to return to the Senate for a further vote because they were amended in the Assembly) and then isn't vetoed by the Governor,the bill won't become a law until January 2007.

That is plenty of time for everyone concerned with the proliferation of RFID technology to work out a rational, meaningful plan of action for dealing with legitimate privacy concerns. The reason why SB 682 and SB 768 failed wasn't because big business beat down the little guy once again. It is because both bills were engendered by extreme, radical views that left no room for the truth. The truth defeated these bad bills, not big business.

Armed with the truth, we have a chance to start again. The result will better serve the public interest.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Creative Commons License
The Canadian Privacy Law Blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License. lawyer blogs