Yup, it's a thing. It's called the Investigatory Powers Act, often referred to as the "Snooper's Charter". It has support from Tories and Labour, despite how Orwellian it sounds.
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
15 points (100.0% liked)
United Kingdom
4116 readers
146 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The arrangement was referenced again in October 2020 when it was revealed that traffic data from UK ISP Sky supported a successful UEFA High Court ISP blocking injunction. A year later it emerged that Sky had compiled data on high-traffic IP addresses accessed via its network to help an anti-piracy company working for the Premier League.
It's quite a specific case. As this kind of monitoring will cost the ISP money (and could damage their reputation) there has to be some incentive for them to do it - Sky Sports had be a decent percentage of their revenue, with the Premier League matches driving a lot of that.
Even then, it doesn't seem to have been used to target individuals streaming the footie but the people providing the streams.
I would be very surprised if their entire intention behind it wasn't protecting their own bottom line from piracy
Oh indeed. They did the sums and it wouldn't take much of a crack in the dam to see those £20/channel subscriptions disappear. I'd be surprised if they weren't also keeping an eye on the priracy of their movies and TV shows but it won't be quite the impact on their bottom line.
I know I'm probably in the minority here but I wouldn't be against getting Sky to watch American football and maybe the odd other channel live, but I won't because I don't want to have to pay a bribe to the BBC just to watch it live.
I know a few years ago there was that thing about storing a rolling years history of all the websites each user had visited. Not the specific page but just the domain name.
IIRC there was a discussion on how each ISP would even manage to store such a huge amount of data.
Was this system implemented in the end of was it just one of those ideas that couldn't work in reality?
it was implemented as part of all ISP/Telco’s legal intercept capabilities.
Use Tor, a VPN or a zero trust client like Cloudflare or Perimeter 81 to browse if you don’t want your internet connection records stored by your ISP.
Yes. This is old news, it's been this way since around 2015 or 2007 during one of the internet surveillance or anti terrorism laws.