On Mon, 8 May 2006, Matthew Poole wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Erin Salmon - Unleash wrote:
Isn't there still an issue with the Privacy Act 93?
Unless someone quietly changed some legislation, I thought the police had no power to prosecute based on evidence gathered from the internet without a warrant?
They might not be able to prosecute from it, but they can get a warrant from it. I'm sure I'm not the only person in here who's helped DIA's objectionable material team track down traders in kiddie porn, after getting a warrant requesting information on who was using x.x.x.x at some particular time, with that warrant having been granted on the strength of a post or two to usenet.
Yeah, but a 'dummy download' which verifies that the content is infact illegal is a component of this. Thats a bit different from some god-like overview of all piracy traffic that is claimed to be had, which is more in the style of an intercept than a dummy download. I too am interested in the 'how', and agree with the sentiment that the most likely answer has been to simply flag all p2p as illegal/for inspection... (And one does wonder exactly how much of our HTTP traffic is being intercepted and scanned for illegal material... surely that is another can of worms entirely?) Mark.