This is a follow-up to my previous post and the discussion that ensued on Quebec Government Bill Upholds Gender Equality and Secularism

Witty not being an adjective often used to describe legal judgments, it is worthwhile to further highlight a judgment that some might have seen in the Globe and Mail: “Witty judgment wins out in lottery dispute”.

(2009) 98 O.R. (3d) 432 is well worth your time to read, I don’t want to give anything away so I will just add that Justice Quinn makes excellent use of footnotes. . . . [more]

British Columbia, home of Bountiful, the town that boasts a sect of religious polygamists, finally bit the bullet a while back and took steps to clarify the legality of polygamy in Canada. After a false start through criminal charges against two men (see Blackmore v. British Columbia (Attorney General) 2009 BCSC 1299, the province began a reference in the B.C. Supreme Court under the Constitutional Question Act R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 68, s. 1, asking:

a. Is section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? If not, in what

. . . [more]

One of the big issues that Canada’s e-commerce / e-transactions / etc. legislation in the past decade was intended to resolve was the legal status of electronic signatures. At least that was the popular impression. A lot of people (not necessarily lawyers) referred to the legislation as ‘the e-signature bill’. (The Law Commission of England and Wales concluded that no legislation was needed to make e-signature valid in that country / those countries, however, and I suspect that conclusion was valid here too.)

Have there been any cases in any jurisdiction in Canada on the legal status of electronic signatures . . . [more]

Major announcement out of Paris this morning with Figaro and the Wall Street Journal reporting on an Open Letter (une lettre collective) to Google from La Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés. Alex Türk, the Président of CNIL addresses his letter directly to Monsieur Eric Schmidt, Président du conseil d’administration et chef de la direction, Google Inc.

The Italian authorities, the Garante per la protezione dei dati personali signed on as well as the Irish Data Commissioner and other privacy and data protection authorities.

Türk’s letter starts: “We are concerned to see that too often, the . . . [more]

Someone should do the court a favour and introduce the justices to a few teenagers who might explain the technological facts of life.

That’s the only conclusion that one can draw from reading the transcript of Ontario v. Quon, argued yesterday.

As the New York Post headline put it: Supreme Court justices demonstrate extreme lack of tech savvy. . . . [more]

The E-Discovery Canada Case Law Digests (Common Law) have been updated over the weekend. Hosted by LexUM, the Digests, both common law and civil law, are part of the E-Discovery Portal managed by Sedona Canada.

New material relates to: Requests for further production, Demands for particulars, Preservation of evidence, Spoliation, Discovery Plan, Proportion and Marginal Utility, Cost Shifting, Admissibility of Internet Information, Privacy Issues, Third Party Information and Norwich orders, and Anton Piller Orders. . . . [more]

As Simon detailed recently the issue of online comments and the identities of those who make them is a going concern and the concern in question arose here in Nova Scotia this week.

A recent story about issues within the firefighting department in a local weekly publication The Coast, elicited various comments in the online version of the paper. People who were targeted by those comments took exception to the comments and went to Nova Scotia Supreme Court to request an order for the Coast and Google to reveal the names and IP addresses of the commenters, neither the . . . [more]

A couple of waves aligned in my universe today:

• I followed a link to “Watching the Digital Detectives: The Arrival of Next-Generation Legal Skills” written for the ABA Law Practice Today by Ernie Svenson of Ernie The Attorney
• The Alberta Government introduced Bill 16 Traffic Safety (Distracted Driving) Amendment Act, 2010

Ernie’s article (I will address him by first name since frequently reading his good stuff makes me feel like we are close friends) mentioned his experience with a class of law students he was presenting information to:

Almost all of them had a laptop in front of

. . . [more]

There is an interesting case being heard right now in the Ontario Superior Court (reported in the Financial Post on April 7), which claims that the province’s marijuana prohibition violates the freedom of religion protections in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

We have seen much pressure over the years for governments to enact tougher laws for piracy and counterfeiting – often based on statistics that lead to conclusions that billions of dollars are being lost because of it.

It leads to questionable things like three strikes laws, the Digital Economy Bill, and the ACTA treaty discussions. Many people have questioned the statistics, and the conclusions based on them.

The US government accountability office (GAO) just released a report that concludes that while the problems are real, “Three widely cited U.S. government estimates of economic losses resulting from counterfeiting cannot . . . [more]

The Ontario Divisional Court is going to hear an appeal of the Warman v Wilkins-Fournier case, in which the issue is whether an internet intermediary (here a blog site) must disclose the names of people alleged to have defamed someone.

The Ottawa Citizen has the story.

The trial decision requiring disclosure is at 2009 CanLII 14054 (ON S.C.)

Both sides are suitably apocalyptic in their predictions of disaster if they lose. (Canadian Civil Liberties Association and CIPPIC intervened against disclosure.)

Those opposing disclosure (on court order) say that whistleblowing and populist activism will be chilled or will dry up if . . . [more]