Privacy question for legally knowlegeable members

[SophiasPleasures]

Good day

My questions regards how privacy is legally recognized for SPs and clients.

In Canada, it is totally legal for two people to discuss anything that is SP related in private (i.e on a private line, in a private room or place, etc.). My question is twofold:

1. What about discussing something or presenting information in a private website, where people entering there are considered "members", since they agreed to this by registering in the first place, and entered the area using a login and password they have applied for knowingly accepting the privacy issue? I ask this in reference of how a SP could be more elaborate in details if she wished, using a password protected area on her site to explain the menu and other related subjects.

2. What about discussing the same issues in an email, if the connection is a private land based one (not a company owned email or connection or an internet cafe), if there is a statement in the email signature about the private nature of the communication, and if the SP uses her private email (ISP email, not a public email server) ?

I searched Terb for some of these issues, and found many opinions on the matter. I thought I would post more defined questions to make the issue clearer.

Here are some Terb threads:
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41132&highlight=email+privacy
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13684&highlight=email+privacy
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8550&highlight=email+privacy

There are many more, but I didn`t find anything specifically covering the questions I stated above. Also, I consulted many sites on the net, that seem to have opinions that broadly conflict over these issues. What is your view on the matter?

Best regards to all members,

Sophia

 

[Fortunato]

1. What about discussing something or presenting information in a private website, where people entering there are considered "members", since they agreed to this by registering in the first place, and entered the area using a login and password they have applied for knowingly accepting the privacy issue? I ask this in reference of how a SP could be more elaborate in details if she wished, using a password protected area on her site to explain the menu and other related subjects.

I doubt this would be a good idea. Just having parties "agree" that the site is private doesn't make it so (otherwise, you could mutually agree that a cafe/car/street corner was "private" before an interaction, and everyone would be "safe"). The true test would come in the form of whether or not you could reasonably expect "the public" to gain access... since you'd be offering up "memberships", and since it could possibly be accessed without membership ("hacked", either deliberately or inadvertently), I'd be very, very careful here. Moreover, the application for memebership itself could possibly be taken as part of an act of solicitation....

2. What about discussing the same issues in an email, if the connection is a private land based one (not a company owned email or connection or an internet cafe), if there is a statement in the email signature about the private nature of the communication, and if the SP uses her private email (ISP email, not a public email server) ?

You might have a slightly better argument here (if only slightly), so long as you only restrict it to replies (if you are initiating outbound mails in this regard... i.e. "spamming"... I would think you're sunk). While there is an argument to be made with respect to similarity to "snail mail", but there is also the "public domain" problem.... It is clearly illegal for someone to intercept and read your snail mail, but it is less clear that reading errant emails... or even perusing bits of data passing via public channels, is "illegal", regardless of how many declarations you make in it. If it is POSSIBLE for the public to see it (i.e. not email on a private network, not encrypted, etc.) I think you're looking at a losing argument....

"Declaring" and agreeing that a communication is private is pretty much irrelevant. The real test you should be thinking of is whether or not it is conceivably possible that someone in the public could intercept or see such communication: A hotel room? No. Car on the street? Yes. Cyberspace?... probably. At least it's probable enough that I wouldn't want to test it.... I don't think it's worth the risk.


Best regards,

F.

 

[SophiasPleasures]

Thanks Fortunato, you bring very interesting arguments. I was having the same thoughts, but wondered how these arguments would come out and evolve here in a thread. You raise the doubts that I had, and that is enough for me to see the problem, (even in any form on the internet) of "public interception" is at the base of all this thing.

Since anything in this matter is a question of interpretation, there is no way around it I imagine...

Thanks

Sophia
xxx

 

[fernie]

I would suggest hiring a lawyer for a legal opinion. Some of the legal advice offered on Terb is wrong.

Fernie

 

[SophiasPleasures]

I agree 100% with Fernie.

That being said, a web site, any website is in the public domain and is not private.

E-mail, by its very nature is open communication and should not be considered private.

hmmm not sure about that, if so, hackers could do whatever they wish?

Sophia