Computer Misuse (Amendement) Bill

[Graham Murray]

"Tom Thomson" <cmt@btinternet.com> writes:

>>   (3) For the purposes of subsection (1), the act is without
>>       authorisation if the person doing it -
>>           (a) is not the owner of the relevant computerised system or
>>               part thereof; or
>>            (b) does not have the permission of the owner.
>
>
> Is that really "or" at the end of (a)?  If so, the only purpose of (b) is
> to say that even if I'm the owner the act is unauthorised if I haven't
> given myself permission.

It looks to me as through the drafter needs to brush up on DeMorgan's
rule. (S)he probably originally thought of the conditions which would
make it authorised but then omitted to change the "or" to an "and"
when negating the sense.