IP: UK introduces E-Communications Bill

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:20 +0000 (GMT)
> From: wendyg () cix compulink co uk (Wendy Grossman)
> Subject: UK introduces E-Communications Bill
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
>
> The rechristened Electronic Commerce Bill was finally introduced into
> the UK Parliament last week.  Since the present Labour government has a
> substantial majority, passage seems likely, though I'm not sure what
> dickering there may be beforehand.
>
> Shockingly, all the complaints and public meetings about the threat to
> civil liberties inherent in earlier versions of the bill (the first
> proposals required key escrow as a condition of licensing as a
> cryptographic service provider; the last set dropped that but included
> decryption powers that would have shifted the burden of proof from
> innocent-until-proven-guilty to guilty-until-proven-innocent) have had
> some effect, and the law enforcement access provisions have been removed
> from the bill into a separate piece of legislation to be known as the
> Regulatory of Investigatory Powers Act (RIP -- have they thought about
> this?) which will also update the Interception of Communications Act and
> regulate surveillance and some other things like that.  The current
> version is a little confusing (at least to me) on the subject of key
> escrow, as one sentence prohibits it from being a requirement and the
> next says it may be imposed as a requirement.
>
> The bill also still creates a regulatory regime for cryptographic
> services, by creating a licensing scheme.  The belief is apparently that
> without some kind of official approval available the public won't trust
> the Net/the service providers.  I am, of course, among those who
> question this assumption, and view it as unnecessary and burdensome
> administration that will only add to the complexity of doing electronic
> business here.
>
> Although this government has often said that its goal is to make Britain
> the best place to do ecommerce by 2002, the really significant obstacles
> remain untouched:  the high cost of access to the Internet (because of
> telephone costs; broadband here is still only available to a few
> selected triallists or those who can afford leased lines); the messily
> conflicting VAT regulations across Europe; and the generally higher cost
> of doing business in the UK (over, say, the US, where many of its Net
> competitors are coming from).
>
> The full text of the bill is at
> http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199900/cmbills/004
> /2000004.htm
>
> Intelligent commentary on same is at
> http://www.fipr.org
>
> wg
> http://www.well.com/user/wendyg