Government black boxes will 'collect every email'

[Roland Perry]

In article <49148BC9.15564.759F908@davidh.spidacom.co.uk>, David Hansen 
<davidh@spidacom.co.uk> writes
>On 7 Nov 2008 at 16:01, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> I would like to see the "Subscriber details", aka Reverse-DQ, provisions
>> completely separated from the remaining more intrusive comms data.
>
>Sounds like a good idea. Perhaps some organisation with a clue and
>which is not having its strings pulled by others could come up with
>such a law.

The original law, which would work just as well today, and is no longer 
within the Home Office's portfolio, is the Data Protection Act - and 
it's exemption for releasing data in pursuit of "the apprehension or 
prosecution of offenders".

>Obviously there are some distinctions in what those who want the
>information can demand. The Egg Marketing Board could only demand some
>information after convincing itself this was necessary and
>proportional.

I don't think the Egg Marketing Board ever had powers to obtain Comms 
Data under RIPA - but it would do under DPA 29(3).

>A law to regulate investigatory powers would have the features I have
>outlined before:
>
>1) for the "subscriber details", victims would be notified after the
>event.

Which has its own privacy implications, of course. Why should I be told 
that my name and address had been obtained (and eliminated) as a result 
of an investigation into Mr David Hansen, who was suspected of a crime, 
and whose telephone bill contained a call to myself? Are you sure you 
want all your friends to be told that kind of thing?
-- 
Roland Perry