<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CIRA Policy is Not the End of Web Annonymity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lawiscool.com/2008/06/30/cira-policy-is-not-the-end-of-web-annonymity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lawiscool.com/2008/06/30/cira-policy-is-not-the-end-of-web-annonymity/?nucrss=1</link>
	<description>The law school blog and podcast from Canada</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:37:52 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Tracker</title>
		<link>http://lawiscool.com/2008/06/30/cira-policy-is-not-the-end-of-web-annonymity/comment-page-1/#comment-2017</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Tracker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawiscool.com/?p=489#comment-2017</guid>
		<description>This article would be a bit more credible if it didn&#039;t rely on a seven year old article quoting someone (Cubberly) is no longer involved in CIRA and who is not even close to discussing the CIRA whois policy.

&lt;hr&gt;

Law is Cool:  Possibly, but the fact is that this policy has been in development since at least 2003.  The position she took is still just as valid.  All of the CIRA balances mentioned are current.  

What is more interesting is CIRA&#039;s&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cira.ca/en/board-minutes/board-minutes_2008_05_07.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; board minutes&lt;/a&gt; from May (2008), 


&lt;blockquote&gt;Holland noted that in some limited instances a Court Order is unreasonably expensive and time consuming and exposes CIRA to undue liability and risks staff is of the view that it is imperative to properly document the implementation process for Section 6 (b) of the Privacy Policy [permitted disclosure pursuant to PIPEDA].&lt;/blockquote&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article would be a bit more credible if it didn&#8217;t rely on a seven year old article quoting someone (Cubberly) is no longer involved in CIRA and who is not even close to discussing the CIRA whois policy.</p>
<hr />
<p>Law is Cool:  Possibly, but the fact is that this policy has been in development since at least 2003.  The position she took is still just as valid.  All of the CIRA balances mentioned are current.  </p>
<p>What is more interesting is CIRA&#8217;s<a href="http://www.cira.ca/en/board-minutes/board-minutes_2008_05_07.html" rel="nofollow"> board minutes</a> from May (2008), </p>
<blockquote><p>Holland noted that in some limited instances a Court Order is unreasonably expensive and time consuming and exposes CIRA to undue liability and risks staff is of the view that it is imperative to properly document the implementation process for Section 6 (b) of the Privacy Policy [permitted disclosure pursuant to PIPEDA].</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://lawiscool.com/2008/06/30/cira-policy-is-not-the-end-of-web-annonymity/comment-page-1/#comment-2016</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawiscool.com/?p=489#comment-2016</guid>
		<description>Was there ever a reason to think that privacy was an issue with dot-ca domains, or is this all speculative academia?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Was there ever a reason to think that privacy was an issue with dot-ca domains, or is this all speculative academia?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
