1. ISPs – Internet’s Secret Police? Ian Kerr Canada Research Chair in Ethics, Law & Technology Université D’ Ottawa University of Ottawa Faculté de droit Faculty of Law

2. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

3. ______________________________________  July, 1993

4. ______________________________________  April, 2000

5. ______________________________________  August, 2002

6. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

7. ______________________________________  January, 1995

8. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

9. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

10. Ian R Kerr, “Personal Relationships in the Year 2000: Me & My ISP” UBC Press, 2002

11. Ian R Kerr, “The Legal Relationship Between Online Service Providers and Users” (2001) 35 Canadian Business Law Journal 1-40

12. Ian R Kerr, “Online Service Providers, Fidelity and the Duty of Loyalty” Mcfarland & Co, 2002

13. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

14. ISP as Agent of the State: R v Weir (Alta QB) “ …it cannot be said that the ISP was performing a governmental function. ISPs are private organizations. They are unregulated. With international agreements, it may come to pass some time in the future that ISPs will be regulated … the wish found in Canadian Government documents for such regulation is no more than a “pious hope” today.” Per Smith J (Alta QB)

15. ISP as Agent of the State: R v Weir (Alta CA) “...would the exchange between the accused and the informer have taken place, in the form and manner in which it did take place, but for the intervention of the state or its agents? … we agree with the appellant that the ISP was acting as an agent of the state when it forwarded a copy of the message to the police at the request of the police officer. Accordingly, this was a warrantless search.”

16. Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832)

17. Jeremy Bentham’s Head

18. Bentham’s Panopticon

19. Michel Foucault (1926 – 1984)

22. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

23. Interception or Seizure?  interception requires authorization  seizure requires warrant  something new ? retention, preservation, production

24. Categories of Information Lowest Level  cna, lspid, billing information  free services  public services

25. Categories of Information Medium Level  traffic data  email: sender, recipient, size, subject line  websurfing: urls, time spent, downloads

26. Categories of Information Highest Level  content data  text of email messages  “http get” requests to a search engine ?

27. Points of Access to an email  draft  in transit to sender’s ISP  in transit to recipient’s ISP  at recipient’s ISP  in recipient’s inbox  opened by recipient

28. Private Communication?  part vi of the criminal code: “invasion of privacy”  s.183: “…means any oral communication…made under circumstances in which it is reasonable for the originator to expect that it will not be intercepted…”

29. Search and Seizure Reasonable Expectation of Privacy  s.8 of Charter  r v weir

30. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

31. New Criminal Code Provisions  s.320.1: warrant of seizure  reasonable grounds for believing…  hate propaganda on a computer system  custodian of the computer system: production, deletion, disclosure  information necessary to identify and locate the person who posted the material

32. New Criminal Code Provisions  s.164.1: warrant of seizure  reasonable grounds for believing…  child pornography on a computer system  custodian of the computer system: production, deletion, disclosure  information necessary to identify and locate the person who posted the material

33. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

34. European Convention on Cybercrime  canada signed november 3, 2001  article 16, preservation orders, 90 days  article 17, disclosure of traffic data  article 18, production order  article 19, search and seizure of stored data  article 20, real-time collection of traffic data  article 21, interception of content data

35. Convention Definition of Traffic Data  …any computer data relating to a communication by means of a computer system, generated by a computer system that formed a part in the chain of communication, indicating the communication’s origin, destination, route, time, date, size, duration, or type of underlying service

36. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

37. Lawful Access Consultation Document  criminal code amendments; or  stand-alone act  ISPs must make systems intercept compliant  penalties for non-compliance  preservation, production, real-time searches

38. “Central Tenet”  ISPs required to have technical capability to provide access to the entirety of a specific telecommunication transmitted over their facilities, subject to a lawful authority to intercept  techhnoligical capability requirements prescribed by law  includes access to content

39. Production Orders  general  similar to search and seizure  anticipatory orders?  specific for traffic data  lower standard  power parallel to dial number recorders  definition of traffic data?  specific for cna and lspid

40. Preservation Orders  temporary and specific to a transaction or client  leads to seizure warrant or production order  ‘do not delete’ order  not data retention for all subscribers  standard and time period?  90, 120, 180 days

41. Intercepting email  need for specific provision for email?  varying standard?

42. a kinda roadmap iintro iidis-intermediation iii try this! iv isp as fiduciary v isp as agent of the state viinterception or seizure viicriminal code provisions viiieuropean convention on cybercrime ixlawful access consultation document xconclusion

43. The Evolutionary Challenge To preserve privacy in our surveillance society

44. Technology’s Janus Face  ISP or internet secret police?  shift from architectures of freedom to architectures of control

45. ISPs – Internet’s Secret Police? iankerr@uottawa.ca Université D’ Ottawa University of Ottawa Faculté de droit Faculty of Law