+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 159
General Chat Thread, Another rushed law, another death knell for privacy in General; Originally Posted by Grey-gear I'm a bit confused about this, in common law (the system of law that the UK ...
  1. #46

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by Grey-gear View Post
    I'm a bit confused about this, in common law (the system of law that the UK law follows) there is no freestanding right to privacy which would make this new law legal as it doesn't brake any law, but as the EU has struke down rights that allow this from happing so in EU law what the goverment are going to do is breaking the law. I'm I reading this wrong or I'm I confusing myself? Plus how can we be part of the EU and want a bigger say in the running of the EU when the goverment just picks and choose what to follow?

    Sorry if I am being stupid.
    Common law is not "the system of law the UK law follows" on its own. It is one aspect of it - all the legislation on the books also form the laws of the UK. We have codified the European Convention on Human Rights (which itself is a codification of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) into law via the Human Rights Act 1998. That means we have a right to privacy.

    The UK government are writing this new law in response to the earlier one being ruled illegal by the European courts. It is simply legislating with a delay - the law will inevitably be challenged, but the courts are slow, so the damage will already have been done. Especially with the sunset clause in place.

  2. Thanks to localzuk from:

    Grey-gear (14th July 2014)

  3. #47

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,727
    Thank Post
    859
    Thanked 905 Times in 750 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    330
    Personally I feel the issues need to be separated. From what I can see, and as I mentioned previously, most complaints actually have nothing to do with the law in the OP. Rather they relate to a 14year old piece of statute that is actually being tightened by this new legislation.

    There's a lot not to like about this story. Our relationship with the EU. The way bills can be rushed through parliament. The seemingly unchecked unilateral powers being given to the home secretary to define data retention regulations. But I don't think privacy is one of them.

    Ignore who has access to the data for a second, that is a separate issue covered by the previous act. The question is should ISP's be compelled to retain logs for a predetermined length of time to aid in legitimate criminal investigations?

    I'd have thought any reasonable person would agree to that? I'm sure we can all think of scenarios where police investigations might benefit from such data - paedophilia, terrorism, etc. Personally I don't see the difference between this and what we do with our internal filters.

    The separate issue is who has access to the data, how they gain access, etc. That is covered predominantly by the 2000 RIP Act. I can understand questions and grievances aimed at this. Although a quick scan of the Wikipedia entry didn't throw up anything I thought was particularly frightening I'd happily bow to more knowledgeable views on this.

    I also think the economics of scale mean I don't feel my privacy is eroded if some log somewhere has amongst a million other entries for 3am last Friday that I visited bikinilovers.com (made up site, not checked, if link is live may be NSFW).

  4. #48

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Ignore who has access to the data for a second, that is a separate issue covered by the previous act. The question is should ISP's be compelled to retain logs for a predetermined length of time to aid in legitimate criminal investigations?

    I'd have thought any reasonable person would agree to that? I'm sure we can all think of scenarios where police investigations might benefit from such data - paedophilia, terrorism, etc. Personally I don't see the difference between this and what we do with our internal filters.
    Why stop with the internet? Why not log all postal mail items? Why not log all journeys people take by car, bus, train, and on foot etc... Why not track where everyone shops at all times? The concept is that of privacy. You're handing over an awful lot of information to cover relatively few actual real world criminal issues - most of which have been dealt with using traditional policing and intelligence methods for decades just fine.

    Schools could benefit know how their pupils are eating, sleeping and behaving outside of school - should they know that too?

    Also, you can't really separate out the access issue. Do you really want your browsing information available to your local authority parking or school admissions teams? They have access to the information that is collected now...

  5. #49

    Bompalompalomp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Wolverhampton
    Posts
    356
    Thank Post
    196
    Thanked 123 Times in 62 Posts
    Rep Power
    118
    There are many legal things I wouldn't be comfortable with my mother knowing, let alone my government and whatever companies pay them for the information.

    I'll give the government my secrets when they give me theirs and are completely open with their practices and the practices of everyone in charge.

  6. 3 Thanks to Bompalompalomp:

    Earthling (14th July 2014), Garacesh (14th July 2014), sonofsanta (14th July 2014)

  7. #50

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by Bompalompalomp View Post
    whatever companies pay them for the information.
    That's also a very good point. History has shown us that the government has a habit of selling the information it gathers. So, its another slippery slope problem coming along.

  8. #51

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,727
    Thank Post
    859
    Thanked 905 Times in 750 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Why stop with the internet? Why not log all postal mail items? Why not log all journeys people take by car, bus, train, and on foot etc... Why not track where everyone shops at all times? Schools could benefit know how their pupils are eating, sleeping and behaving outside of school - should they know that too?
    But the question isn't any of those things, it's Internet data. If we were talking about setting up a government agency with the express purpose of logging all postal mail communications I might have a different attitude.

    I take a more pragmatic approach. What data is being collected? How much data is being collected? Is the data being collected anyway? The last question is key. It's not as if the ISP's need to do anything other than make sure they don't delete the logs they're already collecting for billing purposes.

    EDIT: The problem I have with the bill is more to do with the lack of definition on data being collected and the Home Security having sole powers in defining this.

    Also, you can't really separate out the access issue. Do you really want your browsing information available to your local authority parking or school admissions teams? They have access to the information that is collected now...
    Of course you can, you just did! You've just sighted two access examples. The question isn't whether it's right or wrong ISP's keeping the data they're collecting anyway a little longer. The question is should the local parking authority have access to it?
    Last edited by tmcd35; 14th July 2014 at 01:05 PM.

  9. #52

    jinnantonnixx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    In the Calamatorium.
    Posts
    1,997
    Thank Post
    115
    Thanked 508 Times in 343 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    286

  10. Thanks to jinnantonnixx from:

    sonofsanta (14th July 2014)

  11. #53

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    But the question isn't any of those things, it's Internet data. If we were talking about setting up a government agency with the express purpose of logging all postal mail communications I might have a different attitude.
    Why does internet data differ to you when compared with the other data types I listed? Its still private information.

  12. #54
    mthomas08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,620
    Thank Post
    138
    Thanked 166 Times in 147 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Not sure if I hit a nerve or something but as always people taking certain things out of context.

    I guess for me if they want to stick me in prison for life or export me they will do so regardless of how I feel or shout.

    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    So... because I like having some semblance of privacy, I'm trying to hide illegal activities?
    You're lucky this is a family-friendly forum and I can't say what I really want to.
    Sorry but where in my post does it accuse you of doing something illegal. I was using a general quote like so many others are right now in this discussion. My attitude towards this law change has no real bearing on my life so why should I care? If they wanted to shoot me over something you think they will hide behind this law? Is it going to change anything if I throw my toys out like some did over the whole blocking of torrent sites and parental filters from service providers? If the government wants to do something they will do it and if its that much of a problem go march up London. And no I am not accusing you of throwing your toys out either before you turn that on me.

    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    you've never, not ever, gone over the speed limit on the motorway when it's near midnight, there's no-one else around and you want to get home? You've not crept up to 80, knowing (rightly) that speed itself can do no harm, only the misapplication there of, and an empty motorway can safely sustain that speed and more?
    If they want to sentence me to something I did which was once legal then again what can I do to stop them?

    Although if that's the case the stuff I do on the internet is the same browsing as the millions of others. So at the end of the day if millions of us are put behind bars they will be in the already over crowded prisons.

    Sorry but it may be a view that I don't care but it's half true, every law change is just like the world cup. It all gets forgotten 30 days later because no one cares any more. All we will have is the highlights in 10 Years time which not many people will watch. I don't know why people are getting so worked up over it.
    Last edited by mthomas08; 14th July 2014 at 01:44 PM.

  13. #55

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,187
    Thank Post
    602
    Thanked 2,002 Times in 1,376 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by mthomas08 View Post
    Sorry but where in my post does it accuse you of doing something illegal.
    "If you've got nothing to hide"

    That's what that means. If you're not doing anything illegal, you shouldn't be worried about government snooping.

  14. #56


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,656
    Thank Post
    229
    Thanked 866 Times in 744 Posts
    Rep Power
    298
    Quote Originally Posted by jinnantonnixx View Post
    but how much can you take the word of someone like snowden? Whatever you think of what he did he (i have to assume) broke the us equivelent of the official secrets act and if you cant keep your own word why should he be trusted? At the end of the day rightly or wrongly he is a traitor plain and simple he may of had "good" motives but he has proved he cant be trusted.

    Granted im not happy about the govenment having any more data on me than they actually need (which is imo very limited) but i also cant see any way of stopping this or even making any difference all the main partys i suggest would do roughly the same however much they protest they wouldnt.

    Part of the problem is that just saying terorism means you can justify almost anything to the point where i sometimes wonder if any of the threats are/ever have been anything other than security services wanting to make it easier to keep tabs on people

  15. #57

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    5,010
    Thank Post
    877
    Thanked 1,460 Times in 1,003 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    644
    The road to hell is paved with apathy.

    You may not care. It seems you wouldn't care even if they wanted to imprison you for life or shoot you. But those of us who do care and do worry about the creep of power want to kick up a fuss and talk about it. Marching up to London is pointless - we can't campaign within a mile of the Houses now, after a law was passed based on vague fears of "terrorism" etc., even though we'd not bothered with said laws during the decades-long struggle against the IRA - but discussing it and talking to other people about it and trying to raise awareness of it is the way to make a real difference.

    You ask "what can I do to stop them?" - can't you see that there shouldn't be an us and them? This is democracy, they are meant to be us, representative of us, servants to us! They have no God given right to rule, they are elected to be our representatives, and if they stop representing me then I will damn well complain about them.

  16. #58

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by sted View Post
    but how much can you take the word of someone like snowden? Whatever you think of what he did he (i have to assume) broke the us equivelent of the official secrets act and if you cant keep your own word why should he be trusted? At the end of the day rightly or wrongly he is a traitor plain and simple he may of had "good" motives but he has proved he cant be trusted.
    I trust someone who stands up for what is right more than someone who obsessively follows poor laws. A traitor is someone who does something to damage a country. Many don't believe what he did actually did any damage, but instead did good as it meant the tide of surveillance was looked at.

    Granted im not happy about the govenment having any more data on me than they actually need (which is imo very limited) but i also cant see any way of stopping this or even making any difference all the main partys i suggest would do roughly the same however much they protest they wouldnt.

    Part of the problem is that just saying terorism means you can justify almost anything to the point where i sometimes wonder if any of the threats are/ever have been anything other than security services wanting to make it easier to keep tabs on people
    You know, more people die every day from car accidents than die in a year from terrorism in this country. Bees kill more people than terrorism. Why do we obsess so much with terrorism, when there are far more important things to deal with every single day.

    The amount of money put into the "war on terror" is not to scale with the damage it causes.

  17. #59
    Galway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    West Yorkshire
    Posts
    1,368
    Thank Post
    9
    Thanked 311 Times in 219 Posts
    Rep Power
    101
    We have no privacy, its been illusion for years. Assume everything is logged and recorded.

    "You have nothing to fearif you have nothing to hide" < Who ever said this is a fool or an idiot.

    "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
    Cardinal Richelieu

  18. #60

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,727
    Thank Post
    859
    Thanked 905 Times in 750 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Why does internet data differ to you when compared with the other data types I listed? Its still private information.
    It's not the data that differs, it's the method of collection. The government already has plenty of data on me, if my web surfing habits are of that much interest <shrugs>. Collection of data is a meaningless distraction. Application of data, now that's something else entirely. If the government feels its cost effective having someone sit outside my house logging my comings and goings for no other reason than to keep a log, good on them. I only have two questions for them - why do they need to know when I arrive home, and who has access to this information?

    I got stopped a couple of months bike driving home. Was asked where my journey started and where I was heading to. All drivers on that stretch of road where stopped and asked the same to questions. Did I think invasion of privacy? Or did I think traffic planning?

    If the law says - "police officer must apply to a judge for a warrant to access ISP held data", no problem. If the law says - "rent officer can randomly access database to see what times I'm at home", I have a problem. I don't have a problem with the data retention, just the data application.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Facebook 'to seek consent for privacy changes'
    By elsiegee40 in forum e-Safety
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14th November 2011, 04:40 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 6th July 2011, 05:28 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 29th April 2010, 10:45 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20th December 2009, 02:16 PM
  5. Compiling for another machine
    By Ric_ in forum *nix
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13th March 2007, 03:34 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •