Consultation on change to RIP interception definition
james2 at jfirth.net
Thu Nov 11 13:31:21 GMT 2010
Ian Batten wrote:
> Under the new situation, you can put up a hooky DPI solution, claim you
> didn't realise it constituted interception (the defence BT would use in
> court, were it to get to court, which it won't) and be at most £10K
> worse off. Given actually doing due diligence would cost more than
> that (get in a lawyer, a network architect for a week and you've spent
> that already) it's a free pass. Rather than finding out if something's
> actually going to transgress RIPA, you just close your eyes to the
> problem and plead ignorance if it goes wrong. Why spend £20K when
> you're assured of only being fined £10K?
It wasn't clear to me reading the consultation paper whether it was £10k per
offence. The situation to which you earlier referred I think involved up to
20,000 subscribers, so therefore the maximum possible fine would be £200m.
But I guess that's just wishful thinking on my part.
More information about the ukcrypto