<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.technollama.co.uk/is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence</link>
	<description>Yet Another Technology Law Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:26:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: felixcatuk</title>
		<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence/comment-page-1#comment-2971</link>
		<dc:creator>felixcatuk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technollama.co.uk/?p=2522#comment-2971</guid>
		<description>&quot;The Lawful Business Practice Regulations 2000&quot; 

signed by 

&quot;Patricia Hewitt, Minister for Small Business and E-Commerce, Department of Trade and Industry&quot;

now a non exec director of BT Plc. Which is a little ironic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Lawful Business Practice Regulations 2000&#8243; </p>
<p>signed by </p>
<p>&#8220;Patricia Hewitt, Minister for Small Business and E-Commerce, Department of Trade and Industry&#8221;</p>
<p>now a non exec director of BT Plc. Which is a little ironic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? « TechnoLlama -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence/comment-page-1#comment-2952</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? « TechnoLlama -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:29:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technollama.co.uk/?p=2522#comment-2952</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Glyn Moody, InternetLaw, Ian Parker-Joseph, clarinette, clarinette and others. clarinette said: RT @technollama: New blog post: Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? - http://tinyurl.com/ye59v4y [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Glyn Moody, InternetLaw, Ian Parker-Joseph, clarinette, clarinette and others. clarinette said: RT @technollama: New blog post: Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/ye59v4y" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/ye59v4y</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Links 29/1/2010: Many New Releases of GNU/Linux, Oracle Makes Promises &#124; Boycott Novell</title>
		<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/is-deep-packet-inspection-a-criminal-offence/comment-page-1#comment-2918</link>
		<dc:creator>Links 29/1/2010: Many New Releases of GNU/Linux, Oracle Makes Promises &#124; Boycott Novell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 01:07:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technollama.co.uk/?p=2522#comment-2918</guid>
		<description>[...] Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? What seems clear is that Virgin may have a lengthy legal dispute in its hands if it insists on using DPI. While they have not stated it, Virgin might be taking this decision in order to pre-empt any potential legal threats as content owners insist more and more on making ISPs liable for illegal content shared in their networks. It will be interesting to see if other ISPs follow Virgin’s lead. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Is deep-packet inspection a criminal offence? What seems clear is that Virgin may have a lengthy legal dispute in its hands if it insists on using DPI. While they have not stated it, Virgin might be taking this decision in order to pre-empt any potential legal threats as content owners insist more and more on making ISPs liable for illegal content shared in their networks. It will be interesting to see if other ISPs follow Virgin’s lead. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
