R v (1) GRAHAM WESTGARTH SMITH (2) MIKE JAYSON (2002)

[David Swarbrick]

he is making an image just as does someone who photocopies one. Making can
mean different things. It is not originating an image, but before his action
there is, for this purpose, obe copy of the image, and afterwards, there is
another, which has come about at his request. For many meanings of the word
'make' that should be enough.


--
David Swarbrick.  david@swarb.freeuk.com  www.lawindexpro.co.uk or
www.swarb.co.uk
Tel: 01484 717380 Mobile: 0779 681 0373

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk]On Behalf Of David Hansen
> Sent: 24 April 2002 09:36
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: Re: R v (1) GRAHAM WESTGARTH SMITH (2) MIKE JAYSON (2002)
>
>
> On 24 Apr 2002 at 8:30, Donald ramsbottom quoted:
>
> > S solicited further such images and did not
> > delete any of the images from his inbox.
>
> This case confirms my view that the law is indeed mad, or at least
> some of its practicioners are mad. Asking for further images no doubt
> breaks some law or other, but there is no doubt at all that the
> person (and the software) is not making the images. The software is
> displaying the images and the person is viewing them, but neither is
> making an image.
>
> > There had been a case to answer.
>
> No doubt, but not one of making an image.
>
> > (3) The act of
> > voluntarily downloading an indecent image from the internet to a
> > computer screen was an act of making a photograph or pseudo-photograph
> > because the computer's operator, in so downloading, was causing the
> > image to exist on the screen.
>
> Utter bollocks, though no doubt "correct" in the mad world of the
> legal "process". Where sanity prevails making an image involves
> cutting and pasting things, use of a camera and so on.
>
>
> --
>   David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
>  I will *always* explain why I revoke a key, unless the UK
>  government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
>
>
>
>
>