[Sussex] RIPA

[Andrew Guard]

Geoffrey Teale wrote:
> Andrew Guard wrote:
>>
>> Not going to read it as no matter what it says it just dumb!  Thought 
>> it was dumb years ago and still do today.  Nothing change in my mind.
>>
>> That my 512 bytes worth.
> Andrew,
> 
> Please take this message in the spirit in which it is intended - I want 
> to give you some helpful advice, but it may not be pleasant.
> I find your posting very frustrating. 

Ow did you, well I would recommend that need to relax a bit.

> I know you have good intentions, but making the assertions you make and 
> then finishing your e-mail with the above comment is ridiculous.   To be 
> clear what I'm saying is that you've made some very strong negative 
> assertions about some proposed legislation, and then signed off your 
> e-mail with an admission that you haven't even read the documentation 
> your making those assertions about.  Congratulations you've just 
> committed libel and admitted guilt in the same e-mail!


I don't know about you but you but you have a interesting idea what 
libel is. What did I write what was libelous towards Nic James Ferrier.

Also it isn't proposed legislation, it already law which was passed in 2000.

> If you wish to fight bad legislation you do that by arming yourself with 
> knowledge.  Hard facts.  The misinformed gut reactions, and Chinese 
> whispers you're presenting merely serve to make you look like a crackpot 
> - which just makes it all the easier for people to write off any 
> worthwhile points you're making.   That's a shame because the community 
> of people who understand the issues involved is small, and we need every 
> shoulder to the wheel if we're to get anywhere.
> 
> Instead of make trite statement here:
> 
>  1. Read and understand the act.

I take it didn't fully understand what was written by me as would 
understand that did read the act and understand it ie  "Not going to 
read it as no matter what it says it just dumb!", you might not think 
RIP Act is dumb but would disagree with you every time.

>  2. Formulate well thought through responses to specific problems in 
> that document

That document which is on the home office is nothing for any importance. 
RIP Act is already law.  It isn't a paper on changing the law and there 
are no plains I know off to do such thing ether. What it is thought is 
the home office wanting people to do the legal work for them for free. 
They want to know of any problems they might have with the law before 
they have to go to court.  It the home office doing its home work, they 
have get a bloody noise before with law like RIP ie. terrorism act in 
which parts off the act where found to be illegal and over turned in 
case law.

Personally I will not help them, I want them to make mistakes so the RIP 
would have problems.  Do not be a fool and help them keep this law on 
the books!  By not making mistakes in law!  Let them make mistakes so we 
and get it over turned.

>  3. Get involved with an organisation like the FSF or the association 
> for free software and help them do something about it.  OR lobby your MP 
> about it.

Why get touch with an MP now, did that when it matted with MP's before 
it came law in 2000!  That when they voted upon it becoming law in 2000. 
  The home office doesn't need to ask MP's to vote upon it as already 
law.  The home office is going to active section 3 of RIP act.

> One final point.  Whenever I interview someone one of the first things I 
> do is google for them.   Mailing lists like this are all over those 
> searches and posts like yours would give me very serious concerns about 
> how you would behave in a workplace debate.

Would like to tell us these searches you did as you might be able 
explain that interesting comment.

Now talk about libel?  Putting my charter in question.

To make it blunt to everyone about RIP act:-
1) it was voted by MP's in 2000.
2) it became law in 2000.
3) home office wants to now activate section 3.  To do this they do not 
need to ask MP's, they have already voted upon it in 2000.
4) I did lot of complaining during 1999-2000.  When it mattered, game over.
5) Sadly I do not know Rose Tyler or the Doctor so can not go back to 
2000 again and do more campaigning that I did then with MP's.


http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000023.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel

This e-mail was brought to you by the year 2000 ;)

-- 

C.R.A.P. formally know as DRM
Cancellation, Restriction, and Punishment
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/8080