Quote:
Originally Posted by rryles
First up the usual IANAL disclaimer.
The problem with the CMA is that it is old. It was written before the internet came of age and so is often not very relevant anymore. A rewrite is well overdue. Having said that it can still be used effectively for many nefarious activities. The crux of the matter may well be the "without authorization" clause. It could be argued that by running a web browser that accepts cookies you are giving permission for cookies to be placed on your computer. It is common to imply consent for data to be changed on a computer. However that may fall down when the cookies are forged to look like they come from a domain they have nothing to do with.
I know there are people on here who are for more knowledgeable on the CMA than myself though so I look forward to reading their opinions.
|
The rewrite has already happened and is currently enacted within Scottish Law, England & Wales version of the Act are due to be fully updated with the additions to Scottish Law this October afaik.
I wrote about both the English and Scottish versions of the Act in my dissertation and explained how both versions of the Act were relevant to the Phorm trials (even the usually more difficult English version).
Alexander Hanff