On Fri, 9 May 2008 12:36:09 +0100, "M.I.5¾"
wrote:
>
> "Anthony R. Gold" wrote in message
> news:p6d7241m1107p5kde57n2e7j7355rhr0uc@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:23:48 -0700 (PDT),
>> someone_else_of_course@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>> ok, not criminal, but actionable (not sure if that's the correct
>>> term), my question is towards liability and ownership - does one imply
>>> the other?
>>
>> Off the top of my head I can't think of offences that are committed by
>> merely the ownership of anything, as distinct from say their possession,
>> sale, carrying them in public etc. There may be some exotic offences,
>> such
>> as say owning slaves or wild animals, but those would not be things you
>> could produce and so fall under your employer's claims.
>>
>
> How about extreme .ography? Ownership of these either is (or is about to
> become) a criminal act.
Do you have a cite? The copy of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
I read mentioned only possession.
Tony |
1494578. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494579. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494580. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494604. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494611. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494793. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494809. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494887. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494920. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1494938. Re: Liability of content, by owners
1495743. Re: Liability of content, by owners
|
|
|