Consultation on change to RIP interception definition

[Andrew Cormack]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-bounces at chiark.greenend.org.uk [mailto:ukcrypto-
> bounces at chiark.greenend.org.uk] On Behalf Of Richard Clayton
> Sent: 09 November 2010 14:13
> To: UKcrypto at chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: Consultation on change to RIP interception definition
> 
> There is a brand new consultation from the Home Office which aims to
> fix
> the deficiencies in UK interception law that were identified as a
> result
> of the Phorm debacle...
> 
> ... viz: removing the defence of reasonably believing you have
> permission to intercept [modifying 3(1)]

Apologies if I'm missing something, but does the consultation document, or anything else, reveal what the proposed "changes to section 3(1)" actually are? As far as I can see the only statement is that they will "remove the ambiguity", which is nice, but if I'm going to comment on whether I agree with the proposed changes then I'd rather like to know what the new text will look like. 

I may be reading too much into the consultation document, but Peter's suggestion of deleting ", or which that person has reasonable grounds for believing," from 3(1) would only be one change, whereas the consultation doc refers to plural "changes".

Andrew

--
Andrew Cormack, Chief Regulatory Adviser, JANET(UK)
Lumen House, Library Avenue, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcott. OX11 0SG UK
Phone: +44 (0) 1235 822302
Blog: http://webmedia.company.ja.net/edlabblogs/regulatory-developments/

JANET, the UK's education and research network

JANET(UK) is a trading name of The JNT Association, a company limited
by guarantee which is registered in England under No. 2881024
and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue,
Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG