Quote:
Ertugrul concludes by tackling the issue of legality and whether Phorm breaches RIPA because it makes an ilegal interception of people's browsing.
He makes the point that the body which is questioning Phorms's legality with respect to RIPA is the same body which attacked RIPA when it was first being proposed by government.
|
This is the sort of misdirection and spin that really makes my blood boil. Surely his point is irrelevant to the issue. How does the fact that they may have questioned RIPA make them any less able to question legality under RIPA given that RIPA exists and the law is written?
---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:32 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnHorb
Not sure about 'the only reason the public have issues with it - legality'. I'd have issues with it whether or not it is legal
|
I understand but once a legality is proven ( should it turn out that way ) then your issues can only be dissatisfaction with your ISP for using the system and at that point all we can do is vote with our feet until we have no refuge left.
If the worst comes to the worst you live near me and I'll take you for a beer and we can bemoan our fate in one of the establishments on Washway Road
edit:/ go on Richard, give them hell