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.
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.
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, January 01, 2006
Among the laws that came into force today is one in California aimed at paparazzi photographers. The law includes treble damages for incidents of "stalkerazzi" antics and the possibility of having the publication of resulting photos prohibited. The constitutionality of the law is under question and hasn't yet been challenged. See:
CNN.com - New law hits�paparazzi in the pocketbook - Dec 30, 2005
...The new legislation amends a bill passed in 1998 that established the concept of "constructive trespass" for photojournalists. It said that using a long lens to capture an image of a person who had "a reasonable expectation of privacy" was tantamount to trespassing.
Ewert, counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association, questioned the constitutionality of that law, but it has not been challenged in court, he said. Laws are presumed valid until challenged.
The new legislation, which expands what constitutes invasion of privacy, "is probably even more unconstitutional, if that's possible," Ewert said.
"We don't apologize for the behavior of the paparazzi," he said. "But this law attempts to stop that conduct with a very broad brush."
Labels: information breaches
The Canadian Privacy Law Blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.