Feeds

back to article Activists say consultation on RIPA was 'secretive and short'

Digital rights activists have criticised a Home Office consultation on the UK's main interception law that they say is shorter and more secret than it should be. The consultation (10-page / 37KB PDF) is into proposed changes to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), the law which controls the interception of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Hitch Hikers Guide...

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

15
0
Alien

On display

"What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? Good heavens mankind it's only four lightyears away."

You died too soon Douglas.

4
0
FAIL

Cock up or conspiracy?

One fact worth mentioning is that the initial e-mail address given for responding to this consultation was "undeliverable" for at least a day. How incompetent is that? It's not rocket science to set up an e-mail box or a forwarding rule.

Requests to my MP Bob Neill for an explanation for the shortness of consultation period were studiously ignored.

Incompetent? Quite probably. Not interested in what people who know what they're talking about have to say? Certainly.

3
0
Thumb Down

They want to leave room for themselves

The UK Government don't want to have to take themselves to court now do they? and BT are old friends so they won't be see the inside of a court either.

No privacy for the plebs

1
0
Bronze badge

Blame the EU?

Can you imagine the screaming if some newspapers heard this story?

1
0
Silver badge
WTF?

Heaven forfend!

The "consultation is shorter than normal and is not being run in a way that encourages public engagement."

What? Governments running "consultations" that are rigged to ensure that they get the answer they want? Never!

3
0
FAIL

Move along

Nothing so see here...seriously; nothing to see here.

0
1
Silver badge
Unhappy

That's why...

... they call it "pulling a swift one".

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Greasing the way

I imagine the descendants of phorm won't find life nearly as difficult next time.

0
0
WTF?

Getting Screwed Again

Before the Phorm incident, and the resulting badly handled high level Home Office/I.C.O./police cover up, i thought this sort of thing only went on in China. Such a high level cover up of a criminal act has opened my eyes in a big, big way.

What will happen to the crook at the home office who gave the OK? What will happen to the CEO at BT who was involved? What will happen to the senior police officer who took part in the cover up? What will happen to the Information Commissioner for his part in all this?

What about a criminal trial that justice demands.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

re: What will happen to the...?

Just think "Knighthood". Or rather four of them.

0
0
Flame

You know what to do.......

Get on there now and tell them what you think, it's only an email to do and no bigger than commenting here.

There are many problems in this if it goes through as is which we will have to live with.

For example

Do I as a resource owner also have to consent to the interception of my responses to a users request, even if he consents? Do you want your Intranet traffic intercepted and inspected as a matter of routine, even if it is encrypted.

What about your mail or caching server inspecting packets for routing or storage purposes, or even your internet switches or routers management software, they all inspect packets to some extent otherwise they wouldn't work.

The only sanction offered is a civil fine, why shouldn't they face gaol time or a personal fine? It might make them less 'accident prone'. I mean that was some 'accident ' by Google Street View!

Finally if someone screws with my data why shouldn't I get compensation rather than the Treasury getting to bank the fine?

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.