View CIPP-C Exam Questions

Q: 11

Which of the following existing frameworks is least effective in addressing emerging AI issues while specific AI legislation is being decided?

Options

Discussion

Neha J. Feb 21, 2026 1:10 am

Option B

FriendlyNeteng5173 Feb 2, 2026 3:06 am

B imo, because the Motor Vehicle Safety Act mostly deals with cars and not broader AI scenarios. It just doesn't cover the range of issues the others might. If someone disagrees, curious what I'm missing.

ChloeN Feb 16, 2026 4:23 am

B for this one. Motor Vehicle Safety Act mainly covers physical vehicle safety, not AI in general. The others have at least some broader overlap with data or content related to AI. Pretty sure that's why B is least effective, but let me know if I missed something.

Anita V. Feb 8, 2026 6:08 am

Its B here. The Motor Vehicle Safety Act is really just about automotive safety so AI issues outside of vehicles aren't covered at all. The Copyright Act and Criminal Code could both potentially address aspects like AI-generated content or misuse, so they at least have some overlap. Not 100% but pretty sure B is the least effective for general AI concerns.

Nina X. Feb 10, 2026 7:02 pm

I don't think it's D. Honestly, B (Motor Vehicle Safety Act) is super narrow since it only applies to cars, so for emerging AI issues in general it's the least relevant. The others (A, C, D) at least have angles that could hit AI cases through privacy, IP or criminal risks. Unless I'm missing something, B fits best here but open to debate.

CalmOps5046 Feb 3, 2026 6:13 am

Motor Vehicle Safety Act (B) only really targets issues with cars, not the wider range of AI problems. The others at least touch on broader privacy, criminal or IP risks that could overlap with AI. Pretty sure B is the weakest fit here, anyone see it differently?

Noah P. Feb 19, 2026 11:38 pm

Likely D, since Criminal Code doesn't really get into tech specifics like AI risks. B can cover automated vehicles at least.

Sofia Z. Feb 10, 2026 11:59 am

I thought D makes more sense since the Criminal Code isn't AI-focused at all.

Cameron V. Feb 14, 2026 3:45 am

B , Motor Vehicle Safety Act is really niche compared to the others. Saw similar in a practice set-official guide covers this kind of framework stuff well if you want more.

Be respectful. No spam.

Q: 12

The process of de-identification where new data elements are substituted for identifying information is?

Options

Q: 13

According to the federal court ruling in the Eastman Case, video cameras in the workplace are considered to be collecting personal information?

Options

Discussion

Sara X. Feb 15, 2026 8:06 am

Chris Q. Feb 11, 2026 10:59 am

Nathan Feb 4, 2026 8:18 pm

Probably A. Recording itself is the collection under privacy law, not just when it's viewed or stored. Pretty sure that's what Eastman clarified.

Parker W. Feb 14, 2026 9:35 pm

Yeah, pretty sure it's A.

Jack B. Feb 15, 2026 6:03 pm

A or C? If the data wasn't actually recorded (just live transmission), collection might not apply, but as soon as a recording is made it's considered collection per Eastman. Pretty sure A wins unless there's a storage nuance I'm missing, anybody see it another way?

Nathan D. Feb 21, 2026 2:10 am

Option A matches what the court said in Eastman. Collection starts at the moment the recording is made, not just when cameras are on or data is saved. I recall this from the official text and CIPP-C exam prep. Pretty sure about this, but correct me if I missed anything.

SkepticalAnalyst7493 Feb 11, 2026 6:26 am

A not B. Collection starts when the recording happens according to Eastman, not just because the camera is on.

Aisha T. Feb 10, 2026 10:10 am

A imo. As soon as that recording starts, it's considered collection under the Eastman decision. If it only counted once saved, C would make sense, but I think the key detail flips it to A.

Logan Feb 2, 2026 5:23 pm

Its A, had something similar in a mock and the answer was that collection starts as soon as the recording happens, not when it's stored or watched. Pretty sure that's what the Eastman case confirmed. Agree?

Layla W. Feb 6, 2026 2:05 am

A tbh

Be respectful. No spam.

Q: 14

In which situation could a request for access to one’s personal information be denied under the Privacy Act?

Options

Discussion

Ravi Feb 9, 2026 3:19 am

Option C makes sense here, but not totally sure. I think injury to a protected species is a valid ground for refusal under the Privacy Act, at least from what I remember in study notes. Other options don't really fit. Does anyone have the section ref?

Chloe Feb 2, 2026 6:21 pm

C or A. I was leaning toward A since the RCMP's collection on behalf of a province or municipality might be exempt, but C talks about injury to protected wildlife which seems more directly aligned with Privacy Act exemptions. Not 100% sure though, maybe missing something in the RCMP clause?

Jason S. Feb 6, 2026 9:09 am

I don't think A is right. C fits since the Privacy Act lets an agency refuse access if disclosure could reasonably harm things like wildlife or safety. Pretty sure that's covered in the exemptions list.

Luna Feb 7, 2026 4:28 am

C is right here. The Privacy Act has a specific exception for cases where releasing info could harm wildlife, which isn't something the other options cover directly. Pretty sure that's what they're testing for.

Zoe Feb 5, 2026 1:27 pm

C imo, but only because "injury to wildlife" is an actual carve-out under the Act unlike the others here.

Ben F. Feb 9, 2026 10:32 pm

I don't think it's C, I'd go with A since provincial policing can be a trap in Privacy Act questions.

Quinn Y. Feb 3, 2026 2:55 am

Saw this in some exam reports and it was definitely C.

Jamie Feb 5, 2026 7:48 am

C , but if it mentioned risk to a *person* not wildlife I'd double-check. This clause is pretty niche.

Leo N. Feb 4, 2026 3:59 am

B tbh, since if the info's in confidence even with consent to disclose, people sometimes think that's an exemption.

Ishaan T. Feb 4, 2026 10:55 am

A isn't correct here, C is. The wildlife protection clause is a direct exemption under the Act, while A tends to confuse jurisdiction. Happened a lot in practice test traps!

Be respectful. No spam.

Q: 15

In which circumstance do private sector privacy laws permit collection of information without consent?

Options

Discussion

SeasonedLead2339 Feb 20, 2026 1:26 am

A imo. Private sector laws like PIPEDA allow collection without consent if it's urgent and clearly in the individual's benefit, so 'timely consent cannot be obtained' fits. The other choices don't have the same legal basis, I think.

Noah C. Feb 14, 2026 4:35 am

Its A

Nina W. Feb 7, 2026 12:35 pm

Option B

Noah R. Feb 11, 2026 11:55 am

Nah, not D tbh. A fits better since private sector laws like PIPEDA make exceptions only when it’s urgent and in the individual’s clear interest, not just because consent is waived. D’s kind of a trap here since waiver usually still needs a form of consent-A matches those rare emergency scenarios. Disagree?

Ryan M. Feb 2, 2026 1:00 am

Its A

CarefulCandidate8685 Feb 18, 2026 7:51 am

A since private sector exemptions for urgent cases line up with PIPEDA from what I've seen.

CuriousCandidate5948 Feb 10, 2026 11:57 am

Honestly these privacy law questions get nitpicky, but A imo. Seen similar on practice tests for CIPP-C.

Leo M. Feb 14, 2026 10:11 pm

C isn't correct here, it's really A. Private sector laws like PIPEDA mention exceptions for emergencies or clear individual interest when consent can't be quickly obtained. Pretty sure that's the only scenario allowed without consent.

Karan I. Feb 2, 2026 11:13 am

Why wouldn't D count if the individual actually waives their consent? Is there a specific law that makes A more reliable?

Be respectful. No spam.

Question 11 of 20 · Page 2 / 2

Premium Access Includes

✓ Quiz Simulator
✓ Exam Mode
✓ Progress Tracking
✓ Question Saving
✓ Flash Cards
✓ Drag & Drops
✓ 3 Months Access
✓ PDF Downloads

Get Premium Access

Premium Access Includes

FLASH OFFER

avail 10% DISCOUNT on YOUR PURCHASE