PK Subban should have received a one-game suspension for whacking Marc Stone’s arm so hard that a bone broke.
There. I said it.
Now, on to something else I feel strongly about: Does PIPEDA need to be overhauled to include order-making power—and maybe even fines?
I’m mentioning this because there has been an interesting set of opinions on the subject published recently. Both opinions stem from the same case, which I think is telling. The case, of course, is the recent Bell Online Behavioural Advertising case.
On the one hand, Pierrot Peladeau argues that PIPEDA is just fine. After all, Bell eventually gave in and implemented the Office of the Privacy Commissioner’s recommendations. No more problems from our country’s largest telco, so the law and the commissioner were perfectly effective, thank you very much.
On the other hand, Michael Geist said this: "While a courtroom showdown has been averted, Bell’s brazen decision to initially reject the ruling points to Canadian privacy law’s biggest flaw. Unlike provincial privacy commissioners and data protection regulators around the world, Canada’s federal privacy commissioner does not have order-making power, relying instead on moral suasion or media pressure to convince companies to comply with the law.”
Where do you stand on this issue? Does PIPEDA need more teeth? Do the name-and-shame and court powers offer enough incentive? Are we obtaining the type of privacy protection we want in this country? Do the current impacts garner the right level of attention for the issues in your organization? When thinking about this, remember that AT&T was just fined $25 million because it didn’t do privacy right.
Let me know what you think about this—or about the need for supplementary discipline against the Habs #76.
If you want to comment on this post, you need to login.