Download as PDF
Blog Article
If you look up "interception" in most dictionaries you’ll find that it happens before an action has completed: in sport a pass can no longer be “intercepted” once it reaches a teammate. In a legal dictionary, however, that turns out not to be true. According to section 2(2) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) interception can take place at any time when a message is "in transmission", which is explained by section 2(7):
Blog Article
The Home Office has published a draft Statutory Instrument that will add a new section 1A to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 to establish monetary penalties for "unintentional interception" without lawful authority. This follows a brief consultation last autumn.
Blog Article
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Monetary Penalties and Consents for Interceptions) Regulations 2011 are now in force. These make two changes to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000:
Blog Article
The Home Office have concluded that a couple of aspects of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 need to be fixed in order to comply with European law, and are doing a rapid consultation on the changes. Unfortunately although the consultation document is clear about what the problems are it doesn't give a clear idea (ideally, the proposed revised text) of how they propose to fix them.
Blog Article
Chris Pounder has pointed out that the Director of Public Prosecutions has apparently joined privacy lawyers in suggesting that ten years' conventional wisdom (and guidance from the Information Commissioner) may have been wrong on when an e-mail stops being "in transmission" a
Blog Article
An interesting comment in the Guardian today suggests that the Government may be reviewing the current definition of interception law that makes a significant legal distinction between read and unread messages.
Prev | Next