Cited by 17Law, Rights, and FreedomsCriminal Law and EvidenceLegal Rights and Human Rights

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

From Scanning to Sexting: The Scope of Protection of Dignity-Based Privacy in Canadian Child Pornography Law

Open access
Slane, Andrea·2010·Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Abstract

The Canadian approach to privacy rights in one's body is embedded in the relationship between interests in privacy, bodily integrity, and human dignity. Clarifying these interests is complicated by Canada's middle-ground stance between the European "dignity-based" approach to privacy and the US "liberty-based" orientation. The Canadian approach is closer to the European model when intrusions upon the body are conceived as wholly or mostly non-consensual (e.g., strip searches, voyeurism, and most child pornography). However, once consent plays a potentially determinative rote, the US liberty-based approach gains ground. This reluctance to fully align dignity with privacy results in confusion about the scope of ongoing privacy interests in nude images, as evidenced by recent debates about the use of airport body scanners and the appropriate response to adolescent "sexting." The author argues that a clearer alignment with a dignity-based approach emerging in Canadian child pornography jurisprudence would better address the harms caused by misuse of photography, as applicable to both children and adults.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.60082/2817-5069.1090

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Slane, A.
Affiliations
Ontario Tech University (CA)
Corresponding author
Slane, Andrea
Venue
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Published
2010-07-01
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
543-593
ISSN
  • 0030-6185 (ISSN-L)
  • 2817-5069
OpenAlex
W81197506
Cited by
17
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Osgoode Hall law journal (publishedVersion)
  • eYLS (Yale Law School) (submittedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Law, Rights, and Freedoms
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Law and Evidence
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Rights and Human Rights
Keywords
child pornography law, right to privacy, bodily integrity, human dignity, nude images, sexting, voyeurism, strip searches, comparative privacy law

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review