Justice committee  We certainly will and I'm happy to answer questions about that.

Justice committee  Thank you. Mr. Chair and members of the committee, on behalf of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association I want to thank the committee for this invitation to participate in your study on access to the justice system. The CCLA fights for the civil liberties, human rights, and democratic freedoms of all people across Canada.

Justice committee  I did, and that is my understanding of the change to the definition of a tracking device and a transmission data recorder. I can pull out the sections. This is something that was recently brought to my attention by some people who are much more technologically savvy than I am.

Justice committee  The provision in Bill S-4 that has the most relevant link to Bill C-13 is a provision that expands the exceptions in PIPEDA, which I mentioned earlier. Right now there's an exception, so that a company does not have to seek an individual's consent before disclosing their information to law enforcement or government agencies in certain circumstances.

Justice committee  Thank you. Section 25 says that if you're required or authorized by law to do something, and you act on reasonable grounds, you're justified in doing that. It's basically a justification defence. It's a little bit different from the blanket civil and criminal immunity that's being proposed in Bill C-13.

Justice committee  Yes, I know the case that you're talking about.

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  No. I took issue with a number of them in my presentation earlier. We're concerned about the reasonable suspicion standard for some of the—

Justice committee  Yes, in that regard.

Justice committee  I am.

Justice committee  Yes. The wording of section 25—I know that this has come up in other—

Justice committee  It's been a while since I looked at it, but I know that one of the recommendations resulted in the proposal to create this new offence of the non-consensual distribution of intimate images. As I said earlier, it's not the creation of that offence in itself that's problematic, but in our view, the way it's been drafted.

Justice committee  I am.

Justice committee  My answer is that it depends. The basic subscriber information that would be given in exchange, for example, for a listed phone number is the kind of information that you would expect to find in a phone book and that individuals generally expect to be publicly available. When you have a request that's made by law enforcement to an Internet service provider, a telecom company, and the seed of the request is an IP address, an Internet protocol address, then you're asking for subscriber information.

Justice committee  Not content or images, but if you know the site that someone's been to, you can gather what the content is on that site.