Police drop BT-Phorm probe

[Roland Perry]

In article <48D8BC37.6090002@ernest.net>, Nicholas Bohm 
<nbohm@ernest.net> writes
>>> Q2. is the ISP's defence, "we didn't realise we were intercepting,
>>> honest guv"?
>
>That's the only possible defence (apart from "It's OK under s3(3)"). 
>And even then it doesn't usually wash - try "I didn't realise I was 
>speeding, honest guv."

There are many shades of ignorance though:

"I didn't realise there was a law about speeding"
"I didn't realise the law applied to people driving white vans"
"I didn't realise my speed was over 30mph" &
"I didn't realise the limit on that road was 30, I thought it was 40"

Although the first sounds absurd, you'd probably not be surprised how 
little is generally understood about laws related to Data Protection, 
spamming etc.

The second is analogous to the "s3 ISP exemption".

The third is similar to thinking that if the intercepted traffic isn't 
widely published, it's OK. (There are circumstances where I know its 
illegal, I just didn't realise I was within them).

And the final one could be likened to thinking that there was implied 
permission that made it all OK (I was carefully obeying one set of 
rules, but didn't realise there was a stricter set that needed obeying 
too).

I wonder which point on the scale BT are claiming?
-- 
Roland Perry