Slashdot Mirror
Rights Groups Slam UK Government for RIPA changes
tenori writes "Want to intercept internet traffic but have a pesky public consultation to get out of the way? Just keep the consultation period as short as you can get away with and exclude the people it affects. Rights groups are questioning why the coalition government has only allowed a month for changes to the RIPA act. The Home Office continues to refuse to meet civil society groups, saying, 'We are focusing on those parties directly affected by the changes to the extent that those parties would be subject to the civil sanction or directly concerned with it, or are directly responsible, where lawful interception is taking place, for ensuring that consent has been obtained to the interception.' The ORG said, 'In other words, the many thousands of people who have been adversely affected by illegal interception, and those who seek to stand up for their rights, are not "directly concerned" according to the Home Office.'"
News at 11.
Seriously, is anyone really ever surprised these days to find that government/large organizations are 1) Incompetent at what they do, 2) Try to hide it and 3) There to really do as little as possible, with as little resistance as possible?
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Leave the gubment to the gubment and you be fine !! They knowz what be best fur I an you !!
I'm more than a little scared. Over the past year, I've read several dozen mentions of a government (usually US, UK, or Canada) where the government is working on internet monitoring and interception, usually with input from big corporations, like the RIAA, and no mention of anybody representing the public's or private citizen's rights or interests. Considering how many groups there are opposing them, I'm beginning to think a coordinated legal effort might need to be made by the internet community to make them allow others at the decision table, or to bring public attention and concern onto the matter because they've become so assertive and forceful.
We're facing the same sort of trouble down at the civic level here in Vancouver, Canada. City Hall has no interest in taking the opinions of the community and won't reveal any of the plans for the city. It seems to be the will of the mayor to do whatever is necessary to have Vancouver declared the World's Green Capital no matter what the citizens think of whatever changes are considered needed to achieve such a goal. He's been caught saying that he won't bother with public consultations any longer and all information from city hall now has to be got from a department called "Corporate Communications".
SO we have totalitarian actions happening at all levels of government from the city to the country. Is anyone really surprised?
[Terri Dowerty director at ARCHRights] ...added that the fact that there is not a 90 day consultation "sets a dangerous president and is a very depressing sign of the new Government, which promised transparency."
Would a consultation of 120 days will still set a president that's dangerous?
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
To borrow a lyric from The Fabulous Thunderbirds:
How do you spell love?
M-O-N-E-Y.
Arghhggh. It's the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, or RIPA. It's not the RIPA Act but the RIP Act. It makes it sound like a bad slasher film. "Coming to a cinema near you - the most talked about horror film of a decade.... It's the Ripper Act."
Back on topic; the Minister said:
"We are focusing on those parties directly affected by the changes to the extent that those parties would be subject to civil sanction or directly concerned with it, or are directly responsible, where lawful interception is taking place, for ensuring consent has been obtained for the interception"
So basically, they're talking to companies like BT, and Phorm, who broke the law in trialling deep packet inspection and altering (and recording) their web traffic without asking their customers permission. Companies they want to give the green light to, to use DPI to change how the internet works in the UK, throwing out network neutrality entirely, and relying on 'competition' in the UK to keep companies honest and not screw with customers traffic too badly for their own profit. The same competition that is now pushing 12, 18 or even 24 month minimum term contracts for broadband such that it's damn rare to find a 30-day rolling contract ISP any more.
Of course they don't want to talk to people affected by these changes, or about their right to privacy. There's money to made in the private sector, and that's who they want to talk to, to eliminate the parts of the RIP act that actually protect individual privacy, and stop their personal data being sold off to the highest bidder. Can't be having that, now can we!
Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
You'll be lucky. The new government have explicitly stated to departments that they do not intend to consult, unless it can be quick and guarantees to back up the government position.
The most recent elections elected the tea-party. That is the party that wants LESS government oversight on the banking industry, the financial industry and on oil companies. Because the bank collapse, the housing collapse and oil disaster in the gulf all happened because of to much government interference and not enough free market.
I am not suprised goverments are reluctant to talk to voters. After all, they know the people that put them in power. Would you want to talk to someone who put the tories back in charge of the british economy? Why not just re-surrect reagan and thatcher and just kiss our asses goodbye.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, anyone?
The Raping Internet Privacy Act?
Thank you ORG - I'm delighted that the Open Rights Group are actively campaigning on this issue.
Interestingly enough A survey of multi-millionaires asked that they be more heavily taxed. They felt that they were accumulating too much wealth and that the middle class and poor was being asked to pay for their undeserved benefits.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Interestingly enough A survey of multi-millionaires asked that they be more heavily taxed. They felt that they were accumulating too much wealth and that the middle class and poor was being asked to pay for their undeserved benefits.
Citation needed... Asking George Soros is a survey of multi-millionaires... Just not a representative survey.