What is a "communication" (was Re: sorry, but ...

[Peter Fairbrother]

On 08/08/12 14:12, Charles Lindsey wrote:

> But the whole point of my series of messages is that "they" must be able
> to show "plausible deniability" that they are not intercepting messages
> addressed to UK recipients, and that how they achieve that is "their"
> problem.
>

Ah, but they do not have to do that. There is no law which says they 
have to do that.

They only have (maybe someday) to show (to their pet stooge 
commissioner) that their conduct was lawful.

And in many circumstances, including the ones mentioned, intercepting 
traffic from Alice to Bob, even traffic which never leaves the country, 
_is_ lawful conduct. Even if there is no warrant which specifically 
authorises it.

If it is technically necessary in pursuit of a warrant which covers 
other things, it's lawful. If it's done in pursuit of traffic data, it's 
lawful. There are many other instances.

And that's just RIPA - the new bill makes things a lot worse.



-- Peter Fairbrother