Digital Brain
digital brain
digital brain

Recent Privacy Concerns Call for Increased Transparency and Control

April 2018 Privacy and Data Security Bulletin 2 minutes read

In the midst of the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, businesses should consider whether their data handling practices are consistent with user expectations.

Facebook recently announced upcoming changes to its privacy policies to give its users more control over what information may be collected, used and shared with third parties.

The changes will first take effect in Europe in response to the EU’s new General Data Protection Regulation. Eventually, all users, regardless of their location, will be asked to review and make choices regarding Facebook’s use of their data.

Users will be asked to decide whether:

  • to permit Facebook to use data from partners, such as websites and apps that collect information about what users like, to tailor advertisements;
  • to continue to share political, religious, and relationship information, and whether to allow Facebook to use this information; and
  • users in EU and Canada want to opt into Facebook’s facial recognition technology.

Facebook’s facial recognition technology detects untagged faces and prompts both the person posting an image and the users appearing in it to apply the relevant name tags. It also helps Facebook detect when a third party is using a stolen photo, and is used to make “new friends” suggestions to users. For now, users outside of the EU and Canada will continue to be subject to the use of facial recognition unless they opt out of the system.

These privacy changes are a part of  Facebook’s requirement to comply with the EU laws that  require explicit permission from users, and the broader push to address concerns over Facebook’s handling of user data. In 2012, Facebook had to withdraw the use of facial recognition technology in EU due to objections from data privacy groups. In Canada, facial technology will be offered for the first time since its launch in 2011.

Canadian privacy law also generally requires individuals to consent to the collection of their personal information and for organizations to be transparent regarding their use and disclosure practices. Express consent is required to collect biometric information.[1]

The Cambridge Analytica data scandal highlights the necessity for organizations to be transparent about the type of personal information that they collect, the reasons for doing so and to whom such information may be shared. Facebook already faces a class action lawsuit in the U.S. for collecting or storing users’ biometric information without prior notification and consent.

Businesses should continue to review and update their privacy policies and practices to ensure compliance with applicable privacy legislation and consistency with the reasonable expectations of their customers.

by Mitch Koczerginski and Guneev Bhinder, Student-at-Law

[1] The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, “Guidelines for Identification and Authentication” (2016).

A Cautionary Note

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2018

 

Related Publications (5 Posts)

Featured Insight

Supreme Court of Canada Confirms: CCAA Super-Priority Charges Rank Ahead of CRA’s Deemed Trusts

Canada v. Canada North Group Inc. provided much needed clarity regarding the order of priority for unremitted source deductions in restructuring proceedings.

Read More
Sep 17, 2021
Featured Insight

McMillan’s ESG Strategy Sessions

The COVID-19 pandemic and increased concerns over environmental and social issues, such as climate change and systemic racism, have prompted conversations throughout global capital markets.

Details
Wednesday, October 6, 2021
Featured Insight

Divisional Court confirms Environmental Significance of Ministerial Zoning Orders and Importance of Consultation under the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993

Review of Divisional Court decision: Ontario’s compliance with Environmental Bill of Rights in passing Bill 197, particularly re: Ministerial Zoning Orders

Read More
Sep 13, 2021
Featured Insight

Federal Government Launches Consultations on Remedies Against Low-Priced Imports

A review of the stakeholder engagement process for proposed amendments to the Special Import Measures Act and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act

Read More
Sep 13, 2021
Featured Insight

Mandatory Mask Policy Does Not Breach Human Rights Act

Alberta's Human Rights Commission has dismissed a complaint alleging that Costco discriminated against a customer who refused to wear a mask or face shield.

Read More
Sep 9, 2021