PitbLAWg

Law for Business

PitbLAWg may be AWOL on January 18, 2012.

In a USA Today article “TwitPic, WordPress to go dark for online SOPA protest” Yamiche Alcindor reported that WordPress, along with other websites will not available on Wednesday January 18, 2012 to protest the proposed US legislation, Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect Intellectual Property Act.

WordPress is the host site for PitbLAWg. If WordPress is not available then PitbLAWg will not be online for the day. However, we expect that WordPress and PitbLAWg with be back up and running on Thursday January 19th.

PitbLAWg takes no position on the proposed legislation or on the blackout. Thanks for following PitbLAWg and we hope to see you back on January 19th.

January 17, 2012 Posted by | Blogs, E-mail, Identity Theft, Intellectual Property, Legislation, Mobile devices, Online Reputation Management, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Commissioner, social networking vehicles, Social Networking Websites, Uncategorized | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Toyota advertising case raises privacy issues

In 2009, a woman initiated a lawsuit against a Californian advertising firm and Toyota U.S.A. because of an aggressive advertising campaign that she claimed was designed to make individuals believe they were being stalked by a criminal (which, in fact, turned out to be fictitious).  While the charges are now being dealt with by the Los Angeles Superior Court the case raises issues in respect of the application of privacy principles here in Canada.

In 2008, Toyota Matrix advertised the “Your Other You” campaign which targeted young males. It encouraged individuals to provide someone else’s personal information, who would then receive an invitation to a fake personality test.  What really happened was, the “victim” ended up receiving numerous disturbing emails from an imaginary soccer hooligan with a pitbull named Trigger.  This impersonator claimed to be on their way to the victim’s house, who had no idea it was a hoax. In order to promote the advertising campaign, a fake social networking account for the stalker was even set up.

How would a similar case play out here in Canada? Under the PIPEDA framework , there would possibly be a violation of the law because of the alleged collection, use and disclosure of personal information without consent. Further, PIPEDA’s requirement that the “identified purposes” of any collection, use or disclosure of personal information would not likely met. Finally, the reasonableness test, enshrined in PIPEDA, would probably be violated. In short, the facts pertaining to the case could put the relevant parties in the crosshairs of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and courts. As a result, the case should serve as a warning to advertising agencies to ensure that privacy law considerations are thoroughly canvassed with legal counsel before initiating campaigns involving personal information – especially where people are submitting friends’ data.

November 7, 2011 Posted by | E-mail, Limitations, Marketing, Personal Information, PIPEDA, Privacy, Privacy Commissioner, social networking vehicles, Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 105 other followers