UK Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill

[Caspar Bowden (lists)]

On 07/11/14 18:23, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> On 11/07/14 14:51, Caspar Bowden (lists) wrote:
>> On 07/11/14 15:31, Ian Batten wrote:
>>> On 10 Jul 2014, at 21:14, Roland Perry
>>> <lists at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> <CAK0b=2cu=0GrxSXoA8BedTPfseu0dBAv+qBxmOENd+vgYD17Qw at mail.gmail.com>,
>>>> Tony Naggs <tony.naggs at googlemail.com> writes
>>>>> I'm not really clear why a law change is required for communications
>>>>> data to be held for 12 months. Probably most businesses will want to
>>>>> hold this data for a year in order to address billing disputes & such
>>>> Very few ISPs produce itemised bills saying who you emailed and when,
>>>> or listing which web pages you went to in order to use up your
>>>> 1GB/month.
>>> I still don't follow (either technically or legally) on what basis
>>> ISPs will be able to retain logs of which websites you visited.
>>
>> Up until now, I think the 2003 Code of Practice on ATCSA Retention - it
>> is still in force
>>
>> DRIP 1(2)c now provides compulsion, of what was previously "voluntary"
>
> No. DRIP ss.1(2)c only applies to "relevant" comms data, defined in 
> ss.2(1):

Yes, I agree. I was suspicious the wording in DRIP wasn't nailed down, 
but having read the draft Regulation I don't think that is a viable loophole

CB