Starmer dumps doormat?
pwt at iosis.co.uk
Sun Jan 16 18:17:36 GMT 2011
On 16/01/2011 15:39, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> Peter Sommer wrote:
>> If you stick to RIPA and interception, the general view is that
>> interception only occurs when something is in the course of
>> transmission (as Caspar report). Once it has been received it is no
>> longer "in the course of transmission"
> That's not what RIPA says - according to RIPA a message can have been
> received and still be in transmission. This is the mistake which the
> Police, CPS etc have been making, and hopefully will stop making.
> I made this mistake myself too for a while, as did many other people
> here - it's only about a year ago I said here to much disagreement
> (and apparently one or two people still disagree) that I thought that
> according to RIPA whether a message has been read has no bearing on
> whether it is in transmission or not - so don't blame them too much.
> If you are used to looking at things like letters which are either in
> transmission or not, it's hard to take the step to a message which can
> be both in transmission and not in transmission at the same time.
Which is what I was arguing earlier today, albeit from analysing the
real world rather than RIPA.
> I know the law doesn't actually do this, but might be easier to look
> at an electronic message as lots of copies. If a copy was created
> inside a transmission system it is is transmission. Forever.
> If you copy that copy, or even just look at it , it's interception
> unless you are the sender/recipient, or you are doing so in order to
> transmit it to the recipient.
> This is actually almost identical to what RIPA actually says, but in
> very different form - and it's also the doormat.
> But it's a step to get here, too ... :)
> -- Peter Fairbrother
>  it is of course at least impractical to look at a copy without
> copying it, and it's theoretically impossible if you define look and
> copy right.
More information about the ukcrypto