NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: UK Digital Economy Bill : Internet Policing "model" code
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In message <20100120170328.GB1324@vortex.com>, Lauren Weinstein <privacy@vortex.com> posts an article from Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <isolatedn@gmail.com>: Francis Davey, a practising barrister, immediately pointed out that the poster had failed to understood the Common Law approach to evidence (the "fruit of a poison tree" doctrine does not exist in the UK). Hence most of the remarks about jurisprudence are incorrect :( Myself, I fairly promptly pointed out that Sivasubramanian had misunderstood what was envisaged. First the UK scheme is all about dealing with peer-to-peer filesharing and the code is not meant to cover "commercial online stores". Secondly, the problems that arose in the USA with people looking at BitTorrent metadata (and accusing the U of Washington laser printer of downloading Iron Man) are specifically forbidden by the code. Also, it is not envisaged that raw data streams are going to be intercepted by the ISPs. ... instead the mechanism expected to be used (and is indeed used today) will be that the rights holder joins in with the file sharers, downloads a segment of unlawfully shared copyright material, and then make a report to the ISP to be (strikes 1 & 2) passed on to the account owner (strike 3 is more exciting ....) viz: the copyright infringer freely offers the material to the (undercover) rights holder. That's not "espionage" ! >The model code appears to allow and encourage ( or would at least lead to ) >espionage and indicates that the digital equivalent of 'stolen evidence' >would be accepted by authorities and copyright tribunals / courts. This is just wrong :( >In summary, it appears that the Government of UK wishes to create a >precedent whereby the Internet Policing Code would shatter real world codes >of Law and Order and Jurisprudence. As is this :( >Responses to these observations can be seen in the archives of the thread >http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/private/org-discuss/2010-January/016271 >.html The archives require registration as a list member... but I think I've reasonably reflected what they say. >Posted here for comments from the Privacy point of view. and there I was thinking this was a Network Neutrality list :( - -- richard Richard Clayton Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBS1c83JoAxkTY1oPiEQJgYACggSgvtS3qO+Y2YcNNORqGoQkUR0gAoI+K Ruv2Vr+NepDWT8Q4dZgxxAqs =bQzb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----