[Gllug] Uh oh, ministers consider "anti file-sharing laws"

[Richard Jones]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 11:03:00PM +0000, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
> You seem hung on the idea that something physical has to be removed
> for theft to have occured: this is obviously bollocks.

Hrmmm ... `obviously'?

Wikipedia leads me to the Theft Act, 1968, which says[1]:

 "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates
  property belonging to another with the intention of permanently
  depriving the other of it"

So it would seem like it would have to involve something physical
("property") and this would have to be removed ("appropriates property
... permanently depriving the other of it").

Rich.

[1] http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1204238

-- 
Richard Jones
Red Hat
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug