Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
I am also interested in filing for an injunction order from the courts to prevent BT, VM and CPW from deploying this technology.
If anyone has any information on how to file an injunction order (not something I have ever done) I would appreciate some input.
The main points I intend to lean on for the purpose of the injunction are:
1. Informed Consent of -all- parties under RIPA
2. The risk of criminalising millions of people by making them complicit in criminal breaches of RIPA
I will be relying on the number of popular sites on the internet which already have expressed terms on their site's denying the right to intercept, such as BBC and Amazon.
So I am calling upon this community to try and come up with a big list of popular sites which meet this criteria as this list will be important for both point 1 and point 2. If there are a lot of popular sites with similar terms then the risk of a customer becoming complicit rises significantly.
Alexander Hanff
|
im in the middle of trying to find the/an answer for you Alexander, i suspect a simple small claim might do it, perhaps even the online website version..
not found it yet but this made me LOL
"Anti-Social Behaviour" and explains some basics too.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/docume...ing/pdf/138685
Anti-Social Behaviour
....
What is an injunction?
5. Injunctions are
civil orders obtained from the County Court.
An injunction prohibits the person
concerned from engaging in the behaviour detailed in the injunction.
Injunctions can be used to
prevent a range of anti-social behaviour relating to housing for example, using a property for drug dealing, playing loud music at night, barking dogs, verbal abuse and vandalism.
6. Some injunctions can exclude the person from specified places or areas.
The Court may grant an injunction for a specified period as it sees fit, or may decide that the injunction will apply until the injunction is varied or discharged.
This can mean that an injunction can be in force for the lifetime of the person who it is obtained against.
7. Breach of the provisions of an injunction can result in up to two years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine for contempt of court.
8. Injunctions may only be used to control the behaviour of those with the mental capacity to understand what they are doing and how to modify their behaviour.
9. Injunctions are a discretionary remedy, this means that the court can decide whether it would be appropriate for one to be issued.
Injunctions are increasingly used to control anti-social behaviour in situ rather than displacing the problem, for example by not evicting nuisance tenants who might then be able to continue the behaviour unchecked in another property.
10. Injunctions are quick to obtain. The civil (balance of probabilities) and not criminal (beyond reasonable doubt) rules of evidence apply to injunctions.
This means that injunctions require a lesser burden of
proof than a criminal prosecution, which may lead to a more certain outcome.
They are aimed at stopping the anti-social behaviour rather than punishing the perpetrator.
----------------------
No.6/7 seems to imply you can name persons such as the CEO/COO etc of the ISP company involved and if the court approve it, you get to put the people involved/named in direct line if they or anyone below/under them break the Injunction.