Minister promises that Part III is coming

[Caspar Bowden]

>admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk] On Behalf Of Owen Lewis

>If its absence from the PC can be shown, then it seems to me that
>there might be a successful defence.

How, exactly?

>I think that RIPA Pt III only provides solidly to obtain decryption of
data
>held in store under the control of the person upon whom the notice is
>served.

Completely wrong.

>Get lucky and there are some encrypted files; you then get to know the
keys=20

True but missing the point=20

>I don't think that is necessarily so, for reasoning along the lines
above.

You shifted the ground of jeopardy from "can legally" to "might not"
which begs the question...

>In sum, I think that Caspar is overstating the effective reach RIPA Pt
III.

Wrong. In what way, since your arguments above are wrong.

>RIPA is drafted as it is partly because of opposition to it

Possibly true, but unhelpfully gnomic.

>holes in the colander, ignored until then, become obvious by their
>exploitation there will be amendments as required to close them.
Arguably, >that could require an entire re-drafting and extension of the
reach of Pt >III

That will be a foreseeable source of much anguish and injustice, and
those incompetents who should be accountable for this balls-up can be
certain of having their feet held to the fire early and often.

[snip- inconsequential sagacious-sounding guff and weird asides about
German thought]
>translation, e.g. gemuetlich from the German or hwyl from the Welsh.
..
>over the use of language (German again). This technique is now widely
used
>(especially by the Left) though most of them would not know its=20
...
>Anyway,  I am sure that when I have absorbed the 63 page learned paper

Don't read that paper - the concept is incidental to its subject matter,
and it just had a useful footnote which summarized what you asked. Read
Simitis op.cit.=20

Owen, as on many previous occasions, you have implicitly posed the
question just how completely wrong someone can be in a dialogue, before
they will at least either acknowledge and correct those points and move
on, or one is obliged to doubt the ingenuousness of their purpose.

I enjoy the odd rhetorical ramble with you, but your opinions and
assertions are not closely argued, and you rarely check facts or
recollections. So for this thread, adieu.

--
Caspar Bowden