Is virus scanning interception - The final word??

[Charles Lindsey]

	On Mon, 05 Aug 2002 17:43:35 +0100
	Peter Fairbrother <zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk> said...

> 
> > Roland Perry wrote:
> 
> > 
> > However, they agreed with all my views on the legislative basis, and
> > will reconsider the wording in order to perhaps make it clearer that as
> > long as the infected email is deleted, or quarantined for fetching by
> > the intended recipient only, there's no Interception.
> 
> 
> David Clancy (the chap at the OIC you spoke to) has taken advice, following
> which the opinion of the OIC is that automated virus scanning is
> interception, and there will not be any changes in relation to this area of
> the code.

Advice is only as good as the correctness of the question that was
asked in the first place. It seems that the OIC give different answers
according to who asks them, and the way the question is put.

But in view of the discrepancy between what Roland got out of them and
what Peter got out of them, it would be useful if Roland could try and
extract a copy of that advice. This issue needs to be sorted out one way
or the other.

But if their change of heart is a result of contact with them from
Peter, then I am not surprised, given his capabilities of muddying the
issues so that even a genuine lawyer would be confused.

Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5