Ever have a secret decoder ring when you were a kid? First you received a secret message from someone. Then you used your decoder ring to look up the secret message’s numbers, letters or symbols and find their corresponding letters to “decode” the secret message. Finally, you had the secret message back in its original form so you could read it.
So the secret message might come in looking like this:
* Xyz gera9sor oe piue fjk owlp
And after you pass it through the decoder ring, it might look like this:
* The treasure is under the boat
You could even do the opposite - make your own secret message by using the decoder ring to turn a normal sentence into its secret version, and then send it off to someone else with a decoder ring.
And the more you used the ring, the faster you got so you could read and/or send your messages in less time.
That’s what a modem is like.
Modem is short for MODulator/DEmodulator. Modulating is like taking the normal message and making it secret. Demodulating is like taking the secret message and making it normal again.
For example, when you type in a URL address in your browser to view a webpage, the webpage already exists on another computer called a server. But before the server sends the webpage information to you, it gets modulated into a different version that can be sent over the phone lines used by the Internet to your computer. (It’s really not about keeping anything secret. Rather, phone lines were designed to carry human voice signals, not digital computer info.)
The same is true if you’re sending something from your computer to another computer on the Internet (e.g., sending an email). Before the info gets sent, your modem changes it so it can go over the phone lines. Then the modem on the other end changes it back so the receiving computer can read it.
And the faster the modem, the faster you can receive and send info over the Internet.
And that’s why a modem is like a secret decoder ring.
Copyright (c) Grant Pasay 2005. All rights reserved.
You may forward this article in its entirety (including author bio/links) to anyone you wish.
Grant Pasay is a professional website copywriter, advertising copywriter, and SEO copywriter serving clients in Vancouver, BC and everywhere. Grant is also the author of the FREE e-book, “The Internet Is Like A Refrigerator.”
For copy that captures your business message without any of the hassle, go to http://grantpasay.com/
Check out Grant’s FREE e-book at http://grantpasay.com/refrigerator/
Privileged Communications
Solicitor-client privilege is the legal protection given at common law to communications between lawyers and their clients. Since the privilege belongs to the client and not the lawyer, only the client can waive it.
As a result, lawyers have a legal and professional obligation to refuse to make disclosure of privileged communications, except where the client has waived the privilege; or unless the lawyer is compelled to do so, by a court of competent jurisdiction.
This protection from disclosure assures that client can be absolutely candid with their lawyer without any fear that what is communicated between them will subsequently be used for another purpose, except with their prior consent.
The privilege between solicitor and client is a fundamental right; without it, the legal system could not function: Smith v. Jones (1999), 132 C.C.C. (3d) 225, (S.C.C.) per Cory J. at p. 239 who said, “it is the highest privilege recognized by the courts.”
Accountant Privilege?
Generally this protection has not been extended to accountants, either in Canada: Baron et al. v. The Queen, [1990] 1 C.T.C. 84 (F.C.T.D.) aff’d [1991] 1 C.T.C. 125 (F.C.A.); or, in the U.S.: United States v. Arthur Young et al. , (1984) 465 U.S. 805 (S.C.)
If an accountant is acting as an agent for a lawyer, to facilitate the delivery of legal advice then their work produce may be privileged: In re Goodman & Carr et al. [No. 1], [1968] C.T.C. 484 (Ont. S.C.); and Southern Railway of British Columbia Ltd., et al. v. Canada (Deputy Minister Of National Revenue), [1991] C.T.C. 432 (B.C.S.C.)
The criteria for determining whether to extend the privilege to accountants were set by the Exchequer Court of Canada: Susan Hosiery v. M.N.R. , [1969] C.T.C. 353.
Limited Or Absolute?
In England solicitor-client privilege has been found to be absolute. It was deemed too crucial to the administration of justice to interfere with: R. v. Derby Magistrates’ Court, [1995] 4 All E.R. 526.
In the U.S.A. attorney-client communications will generally be found to be privileged if the four criteria of the Wigmore test have been met: J. H. Wigmore, Evidence in Trials at Common Law, Vol. 8. (McNaughton Revision) Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1961.
In Canada the privilege is not absolute, although its exceptions are narrow: preventing a risk to public safety (Smith v. Jones, above); preventing a risk to prison security (Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821); where the communication itself is a crime (Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860); or where the accused can show their innocence is at stake (R. v. Leipert, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 281).
Although courts may override solicitor-client privilege: R. v. Dunbar and Logan, (1982), 68 C.C.C. (2d) 13 (Ont. C.A.), an override will not be automatic even where the accused needs the information to make full answer and defence: R. v. Mills, (1999), 139 C.C.C. (3d) 321 at p. 364 per McLachlin J.
A court will weigh the principles of fundamental justice, as well as, the provisions of the Charter before permitting the privilege to be set aside.
The Supreme Court of Canada has established a flexible, two-part test to balance the competing interests of an accused’s need to make full answer and defence, and the inviolability of solicitor-client privilege: R. v. O’Connor, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411 (S.C.C.)
Privilege And Income Tax Act
Although Parliament recognizes the existence and application of solicitor-client privilege, it has incorporated into the Income Tax Act (”ITA”) a statutory exclusion for the “accounting records” of a lawyer. That means that lawyer’s journals, vouchers and cheques will not be protected from disclosure as privileged (232(1) ITA), because of that restrictive definition.
Parliament has also provided that the procedures for the claiming of privilege over documents to be seized or examined is only applicable if those documents were in the possession of a lawyer at the material time: 232(3) and (3.1) ITA; In re Sandwell Ltd. , [1969] C.T.C. 617.
Should a seizure be made under 232(3) or (3.1) ITA then the taxpayer, or their lawyer, has only fourteen (14) days to make an application to a court for a hearing to confirm the existence of the privilege (232(4) ITA). If an application is not made within that time a judge may order the documents delivered to CRA: 232(6) ITA.
One cautionary note for CRA is that 488.1 in the Criminal Code (”CC”), a provision similar to 232 ITA, has been held to be unconstitutional under 8 of the Charter. The Supreme Court of Canada found that the statutory procedures infringed the Court’s discretion in handling claims for solicitor-client privilege: Lavallee, et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2002] 3 S.C.R. 209.
Comments made by Arbour, J. in Lavallee (at 21) suggest that 232 may also unconstitutional because it mirrors 488.1 CC.
Privilege And The Canada Revenue Agency
CRA has its own ideas about what is, or isn’t, properly the subject of a privilege claim by a lawyer.
For example, CRA publishes internally a guide for handling Privilege Claims during the execution of search warrants. Their document R350 E (99) recites, in part:
“(3) In spite of recent legal challenges, the following should be noted in respect to solicitor-client privilege: a. It is clear that the onus is on either the lawyer or the client to show that a solicitor-client relationship was in place so that solicitor-client privilege applies. b… the limits of solicitor-client privilege may not be fully understood by all members of the legal profession. Some lawyers confuse the principle of confidentiality with the rule of privilege” : pp. 1 - 2. [Emphasis added]
With this verbiage CRA gives the impression that CRA considers itself to be a better arbiter of privilege than are the lawyers who are professionally obligated to protect it.
Is CRA’s interpretation of the law of privilege correct? In this writer’s opinion - no - and for the following reasons:
i. it is not appropriate for CRA to counsel its officers conducting searches of law offices to ignore the law (i.e. , “in spite of recent legal challenges“);
ii. no search warrant can be issued with regard to documents that are known to be protected by solicitor-client privilege: Lavalle, above, 49.1;
iii. it is the obligation of CRA’s affiant to meet certain criteria and satisfy a justice of the same, before such a search can be authorized (Ibid. , 49.2 to .4; and 487 CC);
iv. although legal counsel ought to claim the solicitor-client privilege as a duty to their client, a failure to do so will not make a privileged communication admissible: Bell v. Smith, [1968] S.C.R. 664 (S.C.C.);
v. 488.1(8) CC reads, “No officer shall examine, make copies of or seize any document without affording a reasonable opportunity for a claim of solicitor-client privilege to be made under subsection (2) “; and
232(12) ITA reads, “No officer shall inspect, examine or seize a document in the possession of a lawyer without giving the lawyer a reasonable opportunity of making a claim under this section“.
In other words before CRA’s officers are to do anything they need to ensure that the taxpayer’s lawyer, or a member of the Law Society of the province, is present to protect the privilege interests in the material being searched.
Thus, the onus is on the searching officer to first ensure that the lawyer has a reasonable opportunity to make a claim; they assume that because no claim was made no privilege exists. CRA is also bound by the law: Ludmer v. Canada, [1995] 2 F.C. 3 (F.C.A.), Chevalier D.J. per curium at p. 17;
vi. Solicitor-client privilege may be raised in any circumstance were the privileged communication is likely to be disclosed without the client’s consent: Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860;
vii. Once a claim has been made under 488.1(2) CC (cf. , 232(3) or (3.1) ITA) the legislation defines the procedure for sealing and bringing an application before a judge to determine whether the seized/sealed materials are privileged 488.1(2) (cf. , 232(4) ITA).
The empowering legislation gives no authority to CRA officers to override the rights of lawyers to claim privilege or to otherwise abrogate the privilege itself.
In counselling its officers to do both CRA seems to be violating its legislative mandate, the prevailing case law, as well as, 8 of the Charter;
viii. CRA apparently still regards privilege as an evidentiary issue, but solicitor-client privilege has become a rule of substantive law: Solosky v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821; Descoteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860; Lavallee, Rackel & Heintz v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. , [2002] 3 S.C.R. 209;
ix. Notwithstanding CRA lack of deference to the courts, it is the Courts and not CRA, which establishes the proper interpretation of the law: Descteaux v. Mierzwinski, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860, at p. 875 per Lamer, J.; and
x. Any communications between solicitors and their clients which are intended to be confidential are afforded some protection: Greenough v. Gaskell (1833), 39 E. R. 618; Solosky, above; Smith v. Jones, above.
There is no justification in the ITA or in the case law, to permit CRA, or its officers, to usurp the decision making authority of the judiciary: Descteaux v. Mierzwinski, above, at p. 891.
Properly Construed
According to Parliament it is the responsibility of the judiciary - not CRA - to decide whether a particular document is, or is not, subject to solicitor-client privilege: 232(4) ITA and 488.1(4) CC.
Arbour, J. in Lavallee (20) stated that, “…solicitor-client privilege must only be impaired if necessary and, even then, minimally.”
In applying Lavallee principles the definition of ‘law office’ should be extended to “any place where privileged documents may reasonably be expected to be located“: Festing v. Canada (Attorney General), (2003), 223 D.L.R. (4th) 448 (B.C.C.A) at 30.
Policy Considerations
It is difficult to reconcile the Crown’s paramount obligation to uphold the integrity of the justice system, with such a restrictive interpretation of solicitor-client privilege as is found in R350 E (99), above: Lavallee, 21, 22 and Charter 7 & 8.
Privilege is an integral part of the administration of justice and legal counsel for taxpayers who have had privileged materials seized, or examined, will have to exercise eternal vigilance to ensure that their clients’ Charter rights have not been violated.
It remains to be seen whether CRA’s position vis–vis solicitor-client privilege will improve, but until such time as it does, taxpayers will have to rely on the courts.
Staff Writer
For Tax Evasion Resources
http://www.taxevasionresources.com
by Karon Thackston © 2006 http://www.copywritingcourse.com
The FAQ page… a standard addition to almost any site. It
usually lists questions customers ask on a regular basis, and
the answers to those questions. But what befuddles me is that
hardly any sites I’ve visited use this page as a sales tool.
Did you think of that? If not, you’re losing out on the use of
some valuable real estate! FAQ pages are generally
well-trafficked areas of your site. With just a few adjustments,
your FAQ page could become one of your leading sources for sales
conversions.
Let me give you a before and after version of one site I
visited. I’ve changed some of the information so as not to
promote (or embarrass) the site owner.
BEFORE
What is the source of the minerals used in your supplements?
We use all-natural minerals from sources such as limestone and
dolomite. Nothing artificial.
[back to top]
What is the source of Vitamin C?
Ascorbic acid, which was originally gained by isolation from
fruits and plants, is produced today by an industrial process.
The basis for the industrial ascorbic acid synthesis is
D-Glucose (grape sugar or corn sugar), one of the most common
organic compounds in nature.
[back to top]
Informative? Yes. Does it answer the question? Yes. Does it
contribute to making the sale? Not really.
Now, let’s change these two answers just a bit, add a link or
two, and see how much more powerful they can become.
AFTER
What is the source of the minerals used in your supplements?
We use all-natural minerals from sources such as limestone and
dolomite. These 100% natural minerals are then carefully
processed under low heat to remove impurities and preserve
quality. Many minerals are processed under high heat, which
literally kills the beneficial elements of the mineral. Because
of our devotion to producing quality vitamins and minerals, we
take additional precautions that other manufacturers skip. To
ensure you receive the most potent supplements possible, choose
XYZ Vitamins.
[shop for minerals] [back to top]
What is the source of Vitamin C?
Ascorbic acid, which was originally gained by isolation from
fruits and plants, is produced today by an industrial process.
The basis for the industrial ascorbic acid synthesis is
D-Glucose (grape sugar or corn sugar), one of the most common
organic compounds in nature.
XYZ Vitamins uses only organically-grown grapes and corn, and we
extract our own D-Glucose to ensure the process remains 100%
natural. No other manufacturer in the world has developed its
own facility specifically to produce the highest quality of
Vitamin C. We go the extra mile to ensure the vitamins and
minerals you buy from XYZ Vitamins are the most beneficial for
you and your family.
[shop for vitamins] [back to top]
See the difference? The “before” versions JUST answer the
questions. The “after” versions boost consumer confidence,
promote unique qualities of the products, and offer
easy-to-follow links to buy the products in question.
By using some imagination and salesmanship, you can turn your
FAQ page into a highly productive tool that not only gives
visitors the information they need, but also encourages more
sales!
These are your friends. Feed them right. Skip the brussel
sprouts and go for the food every one will enjoy. Also
Thanksgiving is not the day to start your new diet. Use the good
stuff, cook with salt, butter and eggs. Start tomorrow with the
healthier alternatives.
Make sure you have plenty for everyone. Guests on Thanksgiving
will typically consume; * 2-3 Drinks, either alcohol or
non-alcohol. * 4-6 Appetizers * to 1/3 pound of meat * 2
servings of all the trimmings * 1-2 slices of pie
Thanksgiving is a big day people tend to eat a lot, so prepare
for the feast.
Have your table set before your guests arrive. Thanksgiving can
be stressful without proper planning. Try wrapping your
silverware in napkins so that guests can just grab and go. Have
all your glasses handy with plenty of ice. Never allow your
Thanksgiving guest to feel awkward by having to ask for a glass
or ice.
Make sure your guests know where the trash can is. You can move
it out from under the sink and set it where everyone can see.
Also have one member of your family be in charge a trash patrol.
Have them keep an eye on the garbage can so that it does not
over flow.
Finally be prepared to send home leftovers. Everyone likes
having leftover turkey and mashed potatoes, even your guests. By
keeping on hand plastic bags or disposable containers you will
be able to package up turkey leftovers for you and your guests.
The best sports for fitness are the ones in which you exercise continuously, those that are least likely to injure you and the ones you enjoy the most. You become fit by exercising vigorously enough to increase the circulation of blood. It makes no difference to your heart how you increase your circulation. The best sports for fitness use your legs because the blood vessels in your legs are so much larger that you can circulate far more blood with your leg muscles. Furthermore, arm exercises tire you earlier because most people have weaker arms.
Some sports require a great level of fitness just to start. For example, to jump rope, you must spin the rope more than 80 times a minute to keep it from tangling. Many people can’t jump 80 times a minute. The safest sports are low-impact aerobics, walking, swimming and pedaling a stationary bicycle. Running causes lots of injuries because the force of your foot striking the ground can be three times your body weight, which can damage muscles and bones.
You are most likely to continue a lifelong fitness program if you pick an activity that you enjoy. However, sports that don’t keep you moving may be fun, but they won’t make you fit. Most tennis players spend about 80 percent of their playing time waiting for the ball; and golfers are often required to ride in carts, even if they would prefer to walk.
Gabe Mirkin, M.D.
http://www.DrMirkin.com
More on running injuries
