|
|
Posted by Anne R on 07/12/06 22:42
On 11 Jul 2006, Tony Morgan<tonymorgan@rhylonlinenospam.com> wrote:
> In message <4hi636F1ruvjiU1@individual.net>, Nigel Brooks
> <nbrooks@msn.com> writes
>>There is far more of a privacy interest in communications conducted
>>by telephone than there is in a face to face confrontation.
>>
> Which has nothing whatsoever to do with Anne's intent.
> Please Nigel - stop blowing smoke !!!
>
>>The whole point of my post is that the legality of a covert
>>consensual recording depends entirely on the jurisdiction you are
>>in and there is no blanket authorization or prohibition.
>
> Firstly, I should remind you that Anne's proposition is not
> consensual - that is the whole issue.
>
> Further, jurisdiction is not an issue Nigel - Anne lives in the UK
> - so why start babbling on about jurisdiction?
Sorry for these harsh words. They are not directed specificaly at
Tony but this part of the thread seems approx the right place to
post. Sorry Tony if you feel I am pointing only at you! I am not.
I didn't post to uk.legal because I don't really need a theoretical
discussion about laws and regulations and common practise and all
that.
I posted to several technology groups because I wanted some
information about what was available on the market. I think it has
to be my business how I use it.
As was once observed: "morals" are standards one applies to oneself
and "ethics" are morals which one applies to others. I will
determine my own morality and that will not be done here. I don't
care for other people's personal morality being foisted upon me.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|