Google seeks to appeal court decision on PIPEDA application

Alphabet Inc.'s Google is appealing a July court decision that determined that federal privacy law did in fact apply to the company after the matter was brought forward in a reference case by the federal privacy watchdog. In a Tuesday filing with the Federal Court of Appeal, Google argued that the judge in the reference case failed to conduct a constitutional analysis of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner's reference question before determining that the OPC did in fact have jurisdiction over Google under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). "The reference judge failed to consider whether answering the reference questions required a constitutional analysis, despite the court’s direction on the constitutionality motion that this very issue would be considered at the hearing of the reference," Google wrote in its Tuesday filing. "The reference judge’s conclusion that the journalistic exemption did not apply was, therefore, made without considering the central issue of constitutionality validity, applicability and operability." The OPC had argued in September 2020 that the search giant “collects, uses and discloses personal information in the course of commercial activities” in a way that it falls under section 4(1)(A) of PIPEDA. CBC/Radio-Canada had also argued in November 2020 that PIPEDA's "journalistic exemption" should apply to Google, given the way most users interact with the internet. The reference case came after the commissioner launched an investigation for a complaint made in June 2017 against Google. The complainant claimed that Google contravened PIPEDA by displaying links to news articles that contained personal and sensitive information when his name is searched through the company’s search engine. In 2018, the OPC sought a court reference on the question, ultimately leading to July's finding from the court. Google also claims in the Tuesday appeal that the judge in the reference case erred in her application of the definition of "journalism" from a different de-indexing case -- Globe24h. To apply analysis taken from that case, Google argues, is a mistake because of the previously-stated failure to do a Charter analysis, and because "this test is not appropriate to evaluate whether intermediaries – as opposed to publishers – act with a journalistic purpose in providing access to news articles and connecting news publishers with news readers." — Reporting by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca and editing by Jenna Cocullo at jcocullo@thewirereport.ca

Google seeks to appeal court decision on PIPEDA application

Broadcast | September 29, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Google seeks to appeal court decision on PIPEDA application

Broadcast | September 29, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Supreme Court agrees to review Facebook’s arguments in privacy case

Supreme Court dismisses TekSavvy’s wholesale rates appeal

Rogers sued by Competition Bureau over alleged false advertising in ‘unlimited’ data plans

Competition Bureau suing Google for alleged anti-competitive ad practices

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us