RIPA and file-sharing??

[Roland Perry]

In article <shbDOxvZ4vqHFwBx@romana.davros.org>, Clive D. W. Feather 
<clive@on-the-train.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Compulsory disclosure to victims after the event would provide a
>>suitable check on "over enthusiastic" members of the Egg Marketing
>>Board.
>
>I don't disagree, though defining "after the event" might not be 
>trivial. While (say) 6 months would be a suitable cutoff for the vast 
>majority of cases, it won't be for all of them and it's not obvious how 
>to tell - ahead of time - which ones will need longer.

And it might also raise more questions than it answers. Spot the 
deliberate errors in:

"Dear Mr Perry,

We did a reverse DQ on your phone number six months ago because we found 
it in the phone bill of a Mr Clive Feather, who we suspected of various 
heinous crimes. We were able to eliminate you from our enquiries when we 
discovered (from doing that lookup) that you were a plumber, and he 
subsequently confirmed that he was just calling you about a leaking tap. 
However, several of the other people he had phoned turned out to be 
usual suspects and that enabled us to build a case against him, which 
comes up in court next week."
-- 
Roland Perry