Starmer dumps doormat?

Peter Tomlinson pwt at
Mon Jan 17 09:38:12 GMT 2011

On 17/01/2011 01:58, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> John Young wrote:
>>> it's hard to take the step to a message which can be both in 
>>> transmission and not in transmission at the same time.
>> Quite philosophically challenging and not altogether unprecedented
>> in the reletivaty of simultaneity.
>> Mistakes in interpretation by officials and citizens might be eased
>> by describing this state of simultaneily more understandably.
> Actually I misspoke slightly, my apologies, and strictly speaking 
> under RIPA a message can't be both in transmission and not in 
> transmission at once {note1}.
> However a communication can still be in transmission even after it has 
> been transmitted.
> An example: I have received an email, and released a copy to the 
> public to do with as they please. There is also a copy of the email 
> stored in my ISP's server, which I can access.
> Because there is a copy at my ISP which I can access, as far as RIPA 
> is concerned the email is still in transmission.
> It's not just the copy at the ISP which is still in transmission, it's 
> the entire "communication" which is still in transmission - including 
> the copy which I have received, read and released to the public.
Which satisfies my concern that, unlike a snail mail letter, voicemail 
and email messages are simultaneously already heard or seen by me and 
stored in the service provider's system. I just wish that regulators and 
prosecutors would understand and abide by that, but it seems that we are 
still fighting the battle.


More information about the ukcrypto mailing list