UK information commissioner warns internet monitoring plans threaten civil liberties and will only c
24 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19968068[/url]
[quote=BBC News][B]Plans to monitor all Britons' online activity risk uncovering "incompetent criminals and accidental anarchists" rather than serious offenders, the information commissioner has warned.[/B]
Ministers want to strengthen the law on internet data retention to help the police tackle security threats.
Sir Christopher Graham said the "really scary people" could simply avoid detection by changing their behaviour.
But another leading watchdog said the proposed new powers were "essential".
Under the government's plans, currently being scrutinised by Parliament, service providers will have to store details of internet use in the UK for a year to allow police and intelligence services to access it.
Records will include people's activity on social network sites, webmail, internet phone calls and online gaming.
Ministers argue law enforcement agencies need to keep pace with the changing technology used by offenders but critics have called the proposals a "snooper's charter".
[B]Question of judgement[/B]
Sir Christopher Graham told a committee of MPs and peers set up to scrutinise the legislation that it may end up only applying to the six largest companies - which control about 94% of the market.
There was a danger that the most serious criminals, including terrorists, would simply use a smaller provider that permitted encrypted communications and take the view they were "home free".
"The really scary people will have worked it out for themselves," he said.
It was up to Parliament to decide on the merits of the proposals, he added, but there were "important data protection principles at stake", such as the length of time material was retained, the risk of unauthorised access and whether it was fully disposed of at the end of the period.
"There is a judgement to be made between the security community saying 'we have to have this stuff' and the civil liberties community which says this is a gross intrusion of privacy and of citizens' rights."
The legislation, if approved, should be kept under consistent review to ensure it was working as intended, Sir Christopher said.
"It really is for Parliament to keep a watch on these things," he added. "You can have commissioners to chase up on this and that. But this will not be one to legislate and forget."
He said there needed to be detailed discussions about how the new compliance regime would work and the information commissioner would need more powers and resources to keep track of all the material stored.
[B]'Dangerous'[/B]
Sir Paul Kennedy, the data interception watchdog, said it was "essential" for the law to be strengthened, although he believed the proposed new powers would be used sparingly.
He told the committee the police and security services could only obtain about 75% of the information they needed to help secure convictions and disrupt potential terrorist activity and this gap was "very dangerous".
Offenders were far harder to trace than ever before, he added, since they were now communicating through the internet and social media, rather than by phone, and sometimes leaving "no footprint".
"We are unsighted in one section of the market and we are in a world which is still extremely volatile.
"Against this background, what is now being sought is not about the amount of information in the public domain but it is about requiring service providers to retain certain information - which can only be accessed in a proper way and when it is shown to be necessary and proportionate to access it."
Sir Paul was asked by Liberal Democrat MP Julian Huppert whether he agreed with recent comments by Chief Constable of Derbyshire Mick Creedon that the powers could be used to corroborate if someone had been sending a text while driving at 80mph.
"I have hesitations about that. I am doubtful about the serious crime frontier if you are in that territory...It\ must depend entirely on the context."[/quote]
[quote]incompetent criminals and accidental anarchists[/quote]
how do you become an accidental anarchist?
By posting subversive and revolutionary comments like this
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38061186]why do we have a monarchy again[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=smurfy;38061506]By posting subversive and revolutionary comments like this[/QUOTE]
Why DO those guys have a monarchy again?
We have had something similiar in effect here for quite some time now; I do still find it interesting how so many countries seem to adapt similiar, or near similiar policies and laws over the course of time.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38061475]how do you become an accidental anarchist?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure, but it'd be a great name for a band.
[QUOTE=nikomo;38061527]Why DO those guys have a monarchy again?[/QUOTE]
It makes money from tourism
[QUOTE=nikomo;38061527]Why DO those guys have a monarchy again?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw&feature=relmfu[/url]
Or in short: To generate Tourism and to tax royal lands.
[QUOTE=Reshy;38061807][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw&feature=relmfu[/url]
Or in short: To generate Tourism and to tax royal lands.[/QUOTE]
but we can get both of those without an actual monarchy
This needs to stop; merely talking about "anarchic stuff" doesn't mean one would actually become an active anarchist. Those old dusty skeletons in Parliament need to be cleared out and replaced with sensible socialist politicians who actually know what's what on the internet.
At absolute worst if this shit gets through, it should be used with the utmost responsibility and understanding, with actual smart and wised-up people behind it rather than hair-trigger bobbies that whip out their truncheons at the mere sight of spray-paint.
[quote]accidental anarchists[/quote]
"Oh for fu-Mary, I'm rebelling against the state again. Could you do me a favor and fetch my British flag?"
arresting people on facebook is petty too, it seems people cannot voice their opinion anymore without getting a bang on the door by police because peoples feelings take over the right to voice ones opinion.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38061475]how do you become an accidental anarchist?[/QUOTE]
i looked it up and i think he just made the phrase up on the spot. the best i could find was [URL="http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Accidental-Anarchist-Bryna-Kranzler/dp/0984556303"]a book[/URL] about a jewish wartime guy who gets conscripted a bunch and joins in on some revolutions
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1jookDIElI[/media]
it's also a song by a really obscure band. the more you know etc
[editline]16th October 2012[/editline]
maybe it means people who accidentally look at cp and stuff and get sent to prison for it
[QUOTE=Glorbo;38061715]It makes money from tourism[/QUOTE]
No. They own most of the land the government builds on - including housing estates, etc. By an old law they released their land to Parliament, and thus if we remove the monarchy we'd have to give them a large percentage of the country.
Not exactly a good idea :v:
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38061475]how do you become an accidental anarchist?[/QUOTE]
I guess means incidents for example "I hate my work, sometimes I wish it would just burn down"
Then they find the police knocking at their door asking about them wanting to commit arson.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;38064311]No. They own most of the land the government builds on - including housing estates, etc. By an old law they released their land to Parliament, and thus if we remove the monarchy we'd have to give them a large percentage of the country.
Not exactly a good idea :v:[/QUOTE]
It's kinda sad people think that the Crown claim on these lands would hold up. If the G.v.t and the people wanted it, you could deposes the whole family of their ''Royal'' blood.
When they started pushing that shit I emailed a few people (Theresa May, and my MP) saying the exact same thing.
Even a child could bypass their shitty attempts at intruding people's privacy, what says a criminal can't?
[QUOTE=nikomo;38061527]Why DO those guys have a monarchy again?[/QUOTE]They don't.
[QUOTE=Patriarch;38062364]"Oh for fu-Mary, I'm rebelling against the state again. Could you do me a favor and fetch my British flag?"[/QUOTE]
Thanks for making me imagine how strange it would be to have a modern remake of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
The Atlantic Ocean- On one side, it's fine to say 'God hates fags' and on the other you're screwed if you so much as say a naughty word on Facebook.
[editline]17th October 2012[/editline]
I had some kind of 'Internet Safety Day' yesterday, and they told us that we could be arrested if we swear on Facebook. I somehow highly doubt this.
[QUOTE=Mechanical43;38066452]It's kinda sad people think that the Crown claim on these lands would hold up. If the G.v.t and the people wanted it, you could deposes the whole family of their ''Royal'' blood.[/QUOTE]
Uhh. No. It's legally theirs, by birthright. Exactly the same as the house your parents have will belong to you.
As soon as they're deposed the government would have to forcibly buy the land or get sued in court. Long gone are the days we ship royal family off to far away countries in exile because we want their land. How would countries who love and want to keep their monarchs view us? It'd be an international shitstorm.
Besides, they pay taxes and let the government 'own' the land they acquired. It's a pretty sweet deal for the government as it is. It's completely pointless (And costly) to change the situation.
There is more and more muslims in the UK now that means more terrorists so this is an invasive, yet necessary measure to counteract the growing population of terrorists.
[QUOTE=Naaz;38068028]They don't.[/QUOTE]
We do.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38062426]it's also a song by a really obscure band. the more you know etc[/QUOTE]
They've had 6 Gold-certified albums, that's not that obscure really
[QUOTE=smurfy (post 3);38061506]By posting subversive and revolutionary comments like this
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;38061186]why do we have a monarchy again[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/HPsoB.png[/img]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.