Report Unlicensed Boats!

[carlt]

You are deliberately using the page to cause a computer to store invalid data.

 

That is a breach.

Please quote me the part of the law that you are referring to because I can't find it and until I see the actual legislation I am not deliberately breaking any law (which is fine, by your standards).

[mayalld]

So you do respect my right to peaceful protest? Do you, also concede that, until you can find legislation to the contrary, I am not, knowingly, breaking the law?

 

Ignorance of the law is no excuse!

 

There is an act (Computer misuse act) which makes it a criminal offence to cause a computer to do anything without authorisation.

 

It is clear that you are aware that you are authorised to use that page only to report boats that you have seen on BW waters, and that adding ficticious reports is not authorised.

 

So, every false report is a criminal act.

[carlt]

Ignorance of the law is no excuse!

 

There is an act (Computer misuse act) which makes it a criminal offence to cause a computer to do anything without authorisation.

 

It is clear that you are aware that you are authorised to use that page only to report boats that you have seen on BW waters, and that adding ficticious reports is not authorised.

 

So, every false report is a criminal act.

This is rubbish and you fail to provide any accurate evidence to the contrary.

 

 

Ignorance of the law is no excuse!

 

 

I have never deliberately broken a speed limit. I may well have done so due to inattention, but if I do so, then I have no complaint about receiving the appropriate penalty.

 

So you are no better than anyone else.

 

If, however someone more qualified than you decides to prosecute me for breaking any laws..and succeeds, like you, I shall take any punishment on the chin.

[US Marines]

Ignorance of the law is no excuse!

 

There is an act (Computer misuse act) which makes it a criminal offence to cause a computer to do anything without authorisation.

Errr....can you please point me to the section of the Act that says that ? Coz I can't find it and it seems a bit (!) on the general side compared to most Acts that I'm aware of.

 

However, the Act does say:

 

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

 

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

[c] to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

Edited October 23, 2008 by US Marines

[fuzzyduck]

Edited because beaten to it

Edited October 23, 2008 by fuzzyduck

[carlt]

Nope...can't see where that applies to me.

 

But....like Dave, if found (unknowingly) to be in breach of any laws, I shall happily take the requisite punishment.

 

Unlike Dave, though, I'll have (unknowingly) broken a law on a matter of principle, not a matter of carelessness.

[US Marines]

Edited because beaten to it

In the tiniest typing possible:

 

sorry !

 

Unlike Dave, though, I'll have (unknowingly) broken a law on a matter of principle, not a matter of carelessness.

Well said that man !

 

(and we'll send you red cross parcels once a month)

Edited October 23, 2008 by US Marines

[fuzzyduck]

breaking a law for political reasons.... He'll be in Guantanamo Bay being waterboarded. You send him food parcels.

Edited October 23, 2008 by fuzzyduck

[US Marines]

breaking a law for political reasons.... He'll be in Guantanamo Bay being waterboarded. You send him food parcels.

No need to fret, we'll obviously include lots of corks, a snorkel & a pair of bicycle clips.

Edited October 23, 2008 by US Marines

[greywolf]

I can claim never to have deliberately flouted the law.

Never payed a builder cash to avoid the VAT? never gone faster than the speed limit,Never stayed from the foot path in country areas.Will honestly declare how much diesel is used for heating and how much for propulsion. Never parked where you should not have done and got away with it. Hats off to you you are the only one i know that can say that, rich or poor. (sorry some one got in first).

Edited October 23, 2008 by greywolf

[Malarky]

Credit crunch chocky bar looming overhead, reposessions in the housing market, sales falling through. These things could all lead to more unlicenced boats, and more people wanting to live on the canal, what if there isn't enough room or enough council tax to be gained? I assume BW has a plan, and I guess that would be to kill the sense of community, and make it a miserable place to live full time, to put people off. A usefull network to have travelling informers on though, theyll want to make them feel at home!

[mayalld]

Never payed a builder cash to avoid the VAT? never gone faster than the speed limit,Never stayed from the foot path in country areas.Will honestly declare how much diesel is used for heating and how much for propulsion. Never parked where you should not have done and got away with it. Hats off to you you are the only one i know that can say that, rich or poor. (sorry some one got in first).

 

Never paid a builder cash to avoid the VAT

Been faster than the speed limit twice that I know of, and got pulled for it on one of those occasions (no complaint, I was wrong, and deserved the penalty)

Never knowingly strayed from a footpath (not a criminal offence BTW)

Will make an honest fuel declaration (I'm fitting an hour meter to the stove this weekend to ensure that I get it right)

Never (AFAIK) parked where I shouldn't have

 

None of us is whiter than white, but some of us try to stay within the law, and accept that should we stray, there are consequences.

[grahoom]

can you point me to where this is state in the Computer Misuse Act ? as I can't seem to locate anything regarding entering bogus information into a database via a web-site?

 

still finding it tricky to find the bit in the Computer Misuse Act that says it's against the law to post a form in the internet with false information... do you have a reference?????

 

None of us is whiter than white, but some of us try to stay within the law, and accept that should we stray, there are consequences.

 

Do you agree with all Laws?

[Malarky]

I've been in situations where I've had to live whiter than white, it just arrouses suspicion, that is how unusual it is. The only possible way round this conundrum is to be transparrent, i.e.- an informer!

[mayalld]

still finding it tricky to find the bit in the Computer Misuse Act that says it's against the law to post a form in the internet with false information... do you have a reference?????

 

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

 

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

[c] to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

 

Posting false information to the page is;

• Unauthorised [3(1)(]
  
• Intended to impair the reliability of the data [3(2)©]
  

Do you agree with all Laws?

 

No, but I don't imagine that it gives me a right to ignore the ones that I don't agree with.

Edited October 23, 2008 by mayalld

[US Marines]

Edited coz this time someone beat me to it !

Edited October 23, 2008 by US Marines

[grahoom]

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

 

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

[c] to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

 

Posting false information to the page is;

• Unauthorised [3(1)(]
  
• Intended to impair the reliability of the data [3(2)©]
  

 

I'd have to disagree, as 3 indicated - 3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

 

what you are doing is inputing Fresh material into a database, so are not modifying existing material.

 

So as the data that is being posted in the form is not modifying anything, and in effect not impairing the operation of any such program, or reliability of any such data I can't see how it would be covered.

[mayalld]

I'd have to disagree, as 3 indicated - 3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

 

what you are doing is inputing Fresh material into a database, so are not modifying existing material.

 

So as the data that is being posted in the form is not modifying anything, and in effect not impairing the operation of any such program, or reliability of any such data I can't see how it would be covered.

 

You are modifying the database by adding rows to it.

[alan_fincher]

I'm almost speechless.....

 

I really do look forward to the first successful prosecution of somebody for entering misleading data into that website.

 

Unbelievable!

[Malarky]

I'm almost speechless.....

 

I really do look forward to the first successful prosecution of somebody for entering misleading data into that website.

 

Unbelievable!

[carlt]

3 Unauthorised modification of computer material

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if—

(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and

at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.

 

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing—

(a) to impair the operation of any computer;

to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or

[c] to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.

 

Posting false information to the page is;

• Unauthorised [3(1)(]
  
• Intended to impair the reliability of the data [3(2)©]
  

 

No, but I don't imagine that it gives me a right to ignore the ones that I don't agree with.

 

The law is unclear on this but I believe the closest my actions can get to are adware or spyware (both of which are far worse than anything I've actually done) and are specifically mentioned as not unlawful.

 

My act was not unauthorised, it asked for information so BW could investigate further therefore it was set up with the assumption that not all reports will be accurate. I believe anything I have reported, in every case, is at least 75% accurate, better than many, I'd guess. A system that is set up assuming inaccurate data entry must, therefore, be authorising such entries.

 

My act is not intended to impair the reliability of the data. That data is inherently unreliable, until investigated further, otherwise BW would go straight on, with a prosecution, without further investigation.

 

Not guilty m'lud.

Edited October 23, 2008 by carlt

[grahoom]

You are modifying the database by adding rows to it.

 

You're authorised to add content to the database... Is there somewhere on the BW site that says - explicitly that you are prohibited to use the form unless it is a genuine "snitch" ? if not, then essentially anyone can add anything to their database - they have made their database open to the public.

[Jason Wilson and Family]

If you would care to quote an analogy that is even remotely possible, I might answer.

 

Creating ridiculous and impossible scenarios to prove a point isn't a game that I will play.

Ridiculous and impossible is it? Fine then how about this one?

 

If in the name of population control you were ordered to abort an unborn child would you do it?

 

China's one child policy was established by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in 1979 to limit communist China's population growth. Although designated a "temporary measure," it continues a quarter-century after its establishment. The policy limits couples to one child. Fines, pressures to abort a pregnancy, and even forced sterilization accompanied second or subsequent pregnancies.

 

It's only ridiculous to you Dave because you currently live in a society where the laws aren't that bad. You're too bloody narrowminded to see outside your little box to what could be and the future consequences of actions.

 

As for only commiting lawful protests, what happens when protesting is made against the law in the name of preserving peace?

Edited October 23, 2008 by Jason Wilson and Family

[carlt]

As for only commiting lawful protests, what happens when protesting is made against the law in the name of preserving peace?

It's already happened, over here.

[Malarky]

It's already happened, over here.

The public order act.