Information does not constitute a document

[Nicholas Bohm]

At 11:17 AM 8/18/1999 +0100, Ian Brown wrote:

>Does this have any effect on the current validity of electronic signatures
>on "documents" or the DTI's proposals?
>
>The Times Law Report, 17 August 1999
>
>....In summary, a document was a material object which contained information
>capable of extraction from it... 
>
>Information of itself could not constitute a document, and the transmission
>of information of itself could not constitute the transmission of a
>document...
>
>http://www.the-times.co.uk/news/pages/tim/99/08/17/timlawcha01001.html?1044
816

It provides a neat illustration of the ills (this time, as it happens,
afflicting Government in the persons of Her Majesty's Unfortunate
Commissioners of Customs and Excise) caused by "document" not including
"electronic document".  In this case it is the prohibition on circulating
documents advertising betting (under subsection 9(1)(b) of the Betting and
Gaming Duties Act 1981) that turned out not to catch teletext.

This is the sort of problem that the Bill proposes should be solved, one by
one, by different departments, using the clause 8 powers.  An alternative,
of course, would be to do it all at one blow, but with a power to exclude
specific cases where it wouldn't work well (like cheques and bills of
lading, where production of a single physical original is of the essence of
the system, and conversion to electronics needs a new system).  If the
power had a sunset clause, so it expired in two or three years, that really
would prove Government meant to get a move on, and might make Britain look
really committed.  (It also happens to reflect the approach of the draft
Electronic Commerce Directive.)

Of course there would be bloomers with this approach (although the supposed
terrors of electronic marriages or birth registrations are entirely
mythical, since these are not done on paper anyway but by personal
attendance), but there are bloomers with all legislation.  Teletext and
indeed television has been around long enough for subsection 9(1)(b) of the
Betting and Gaming Duties Act 1981 to provide quite a good example.

Regards,

Nicholas Bohm

Salkyns, Great Canfield,
Takeley, Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK

Phone		01279 871272	(+44 1279 871272)
Fax		01279 870215	(+44 1279 870215)
Mobile   	0860 636749  	(+44 860 636749)

PGP RSA 1024 bit public key ID: 0x08340015.  Fingerprint:
9E 15 FB 2A 54 96 24 37  98 A2 E0 D1 34 13 48 07
PGP DSS/DH 1024/3072 public key ID: 0x899DD7FF.  Fingerprint:
5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B  A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF