> From: Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> > On 1 July 2012 21:46, James Forrester <ja...@jdforrester.org> wrote: > > On 1 July 2012 13:00, Tom Morris <t...@tommorris.org> wrote: > >> None of which will matter if the law is so broadly drawn that > >> Wikimedia UK or even an individual Wikimedian could be held to be an > >> operator of a telecommunications system. > > > > It's entirely foreseeable that UK police would consider anyone with > > 'higher' rights (probably +sysop, definitely +bureaucrat, and > > without-doubt +oversight, +checkuser, and +steward) as having > > sufficient level of control and access to privileged data that normal > > members of the public wouldn't that they count as 'operators'. > > How about we avoid spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt? > > The courts have always been able to subpoena people to provide > evidence. This act is about requiring people to store information so > that it is available should someone want to subpoena it.#
Wrong. This act clearly sets out to allow the police access to stored data without recourse to a judge. And, given the Leveson revelations, one can assume that such powers would eventually be abused. I've already contacted Julian Huppert MP, who is to sit on the committee looking at turning the draft into legislation. He's already voiced concerns, so I've largely supplied him with ammunition to challenge Whitehall mandarins with. Within the next month I'm moving the wikinewsie.org hosting to Iceland. I won't be complying with any requests for logs, so if they ever came I assume I'd be subject to indefinite detention under similar clauses to those in RIPA. Brian McNeil -- 69/6 Albert Street, Edinburgh. EH7 5LR. SCOTLAND Wikinews, Accredited Reporter. | GSM: +44 (0)788 987 8314 "Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
