Today’s Times carries a very interesting front page with the same headline as this post’s title.
Liberal Democrat Stephen Tall’s blog has an analysis of the article and names three of the nine cybersecurity experts who have reportedly challenged the Coalition “government” to drop this cock eyed and illiberal scheme.
VFPJ has been against any kind of state monitoring of the internet since the Labour “government” first mooted the idea. In 2009 I politely told the APCOMMS committee that Parliament is clueless in dealing with technical issues and should seek the advice of a committee of independent experts. Given that they have not, I would dearly like to know the names and qualifications of those who have told the “government” that this monitoring scheme is a technically feasible and good idea.
Let’s see who the control freaks really are. Let’s put their ideas out to peer analysis.
Update: Big Brother Watch has a report including the text of the letter sent to David Cameron. You will see one of the points made is strikingly similar to those made in the campaign against Phorm.
Today saw the disgraced, discredited bully Andrew Crossley up before the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal on 7 charges relating to ACS:Law’s (his former company, since shut down) harassment of alleged file-sharers. ISPreview’s commentary on proceedings is worth reading, particularly the section dealing with how, even though declared bankrupt, Crossley still lives the high life. Crossley has also still to pay the fine levied on him by the ICO.
Continue Reading →
Sloppy and shoddy practices, questionable conduct, failing to provide information. No, this isn’t another post about ACS:Law. Bear these phrases in mind as we take a look at karma visiting a US based legal firm and paying them back big time.
The internet powered age provides many positives. These same positives can also become major pitfalls, as the Steven J. Baum foreclosure firm found out last month.
Continue Reading →