----- Original Message -----
From: Gareth Owen <wiki(a)gwowen.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Monday, March 1, 2004 12:47 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Trading with the Enemy
Rick <giantsrick13(a)yahoo.com> writes:
Rick a écrit:
> Where would you suggest? In France, it's illegal to criticize
the
> government. In Germany, it's illegal to
display Nazi
memorabilia. In
the UK
there's the Official Secrets Act to deal with.
I am seriously asking what is wrong with what I posted here.
Please
explain
what I said that angered you, and what is
libelous?
Well, you seem pretty ignorant of the scope of the Official
Secrets Act for a
start. Let me quote Section I for the gist:
1. (1) A person who is or has been?
(a) a member of the security and intelligence services; or
(b) a person notified that he is subject to the provisions
of this subsection,
is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he discloses any
information, document or other article relating to security or
intelligence which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his
position as a member of any of those services
So (i) It applies to employees of the government
(ii) Its about prevent the dissemination of classified
information
Its applicability to wikipedia is precisely nil, unless you have
reason to
believe British security personnel are posting classified information.
Do the laws that convicted [[Robert Hanssen]] impinge on
wikipedia's operation?
No. Similar with regards to the UK's Official Secrets Act, AFAIK, too.
You simply can *not* become subject to security restrictions, Official Secrets Act(s),
etc. without knowing it.
Sorry, no. Government does NOT work that way. If you're subject to such an act,
you'll *know*; You will inevitably have to complete a small mountain of paperwork to
recieve access to subject information.*
Do the laws that [[Robert Hanssen]] was convicted under affect Wiki?
Do the laws that [[Katherine Gun]] was charged under affect Wiki?
In both cases, no.
In order for them to, you would have to KNOW you were recieving classified information. In
the US and the UK (and in most other NATO countries, AFAIK), it's hard NOT to know:
Classification markings are very, very hard to miss.
In such a situation, you really have to be impossibly stupid to recieve such information
and NOT know it.
John
---
*One exception applies, that I know of: Oddly, members of the US House and Senate
don't need security clearances as such. They don't go through the whole mountain
of forms, the Single Scope Background Investigation, etc, etc. Instead, they're bound
by an oath taken when they join the appropriate committee (or assume leadership positions
like Speaker, Senate Majority Leader, Senate Minority Leader, or House Minority Leader).
It's odd, but (amazingly, to those who know much about American government) it works;
Leaks of classified information from the committees (particularly the intelligence
oversight committees) have been rare.