tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6273930.post113775438648744205..comments2024-03-08T07:29:54.585-04:00Comments on Canadian Privacy Law Blog: Legal conflicts for bloggersprivacylawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03943567746055311435noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6273930.post-1137776800154663592006-01-20T13:06:00.000-04:002006-01-20T13:06:00.000-04:00This issue is a real conundrum. As lawyers, we cl...This issue is a real conundrum. As lawyers, we clearly can't say anything in our blogs that would breach a client confidence. And it would not be good business to say anything that might risk a business relationship with a client.<BR/><BR/>There is nothing we can do about that. Of course this gets increasingly restrictive the larger the size of the firm gets. And in large firms the internal processes could delay blog entries, which puts a crimp on blogging.<BR/><BR/>While as bloggers we are not expected to be as "independent" or "unbiased" as journalists, we don't want to be perceived as being unduly influenced by others. Bloggers that have pretended to be independent, but are simply marketing or espousing a certain point of view without declaring who they really are or why they are doing it, have been chastised, and rightly so.<BR/><BR/>When thinking about this, I compared it to the Sam Bulte controversy where concern has been raised about entertainment industry fundraising for an MP. I see legal blogger issues as different for a couple of reasons. These ethical requirements generally lead to omission, rather than bias or the perception of bias. We are very open about the issue. And there is nothing wrong with being an advocate for an issue or a client(after all, that is what lawyers do) - provided of course that if we are advocating on behalf of a client, we say so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6273930.post-1137761923470270402006-01-20T08:58:00.000-04:002006-01-20T08:58:00.000-04:00Agreed, David. And I don't think there is an easy...Agreed, David. And I don't think there is an easy way to deal with this. Complying with firms' conflict-checking procedures seems an inevitable requirement for firms of any size. This is one of the factors I credit with the slow adoption of blogs by large firms.<BR/><BR/>I'd be interested to hear from law bloggers south of the border, who are likely ahead of us on this issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6273930.post-1137760942124172752006-01-20T08:42:00.000-04:002006-01-20T08:42:00.000-04:00The issue of bloggers and its conflicts is interes...The issue of bloggers and its conflicts is interesting. As a "data protection" researcher myself, blogging is one of the issues that I have examined in the context of the European Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (DPD). In particular, the tensions that exist between the protection of someone's privacy and the protection of freedom of speech. Indeed, Art. 9 of the DPD expressly provides for exemptions if the <BR/>processing of personal data was carried out solely for journalistic purposes or the purpose of artistic or literary expression. <BR/><BR/>The question is whether a blogger could be considered to be writing their views/comments as being "solely" for journalistic purposes/literary expression? I raise these problems because the DPD was implemented prior to the age where blogging/podcasting really took off. With the exception of the case of Lindqvist by the European Court of Justice, we don't really have any specific legal ruling on this. I would not be happy if a blogger should find him/herself inhibited from exercising their right to the freedom of expression as a result of the DPD or national laws implementing this.DP Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10663628557007598205noreply@blogger.com