Penalty for reading e-mail on anther person's pc?

[Ext User(John Phillips)]

Sorry if off topic for this list.

Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
their e-mail without permission?

What is the penalty, if any?

Roddles, do you know?

[Ext User(Tim Fairchild)]

So then this guy called John Phillips said something like:

> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?

If they are in the house with the PC legally, then I doubt it. If you are
worried about that, then you'd best secure the PC.

I mean, is it illegal for a visitor to read a letter you left lying on the
kitchen table... Don't think it would go to court somehow unless they broke
in.

Ask a lawyer or the police, perhaps.

--
Tim Fairchild - Queensland Australia
Mandriva Linux release 2007.0 (Official) for x86_64
Linux 2.6.20.3 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 2800+
NVRM version: NVIDIA UNIX x86_64 Kernel Module 1.0-9746

[Ext User(Whisper)]

John Phillips wrote:
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?


Gaol time usually, but if 1st offence you may get off with soft judge....

[Ext User(Tim Fairchild)]

So then this guy called Whisper said something like:

> John Phillips wrote:
>> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>>
>> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
>> their e-mail without permission?
>>
>> What is the penalty, if any?
>>
>> Roddles, do you know?
>
>
> Gaol time usually, but if 1st offence you may get off with soft judge....

Don't even get gaol time for growing dope (at least not the first 10 times)
and shooting people around here. Reading emails wouldn't make a mention...

--
Tim Fairchild - Queensland Australia
Mandriva Linux release 2007.0 (Official) for x86_64
Linux 2.6.20.3 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 2800+
NVRM version: NVIDIA UNIX x86_64 Kernel Module 1.0-9746

[Ext User(Craig Welch)]

John Phillips wrote:

> Sorry if off topic for this list.

It's not off topic.

This is not a list, it's a newsgroup.

> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?

No.

> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?

No, he doesn't.

--
Craig

[Ext User(Colin)]

"John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?

You find out what people really think about you.

[Ext User(Clockmeister)]

"John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?

If you want a correct answer you would be better off asking in aus.legal if
you already haven't.

Rod confuses opinion with fact all too often to be relied upon.

[Ext User(Aaron Meadows)]

hahahaha are you serious ?

--
Aaron Meadows
Switchboard Operator
Email: aaronmeadows@team.dodo.com.au
Phone: 1300 666 330
Fax: 1300 552 649
Dodo Australia Pty Ltd
Level 2, 1001 Nepean Hwy
Moorabbin VIC 3189
"John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?

[Ext User(SG1)]

"Tim Fairchild" <usenet@bcs4me.com> wrote in message
news:45f927ac$0$24083$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> So then this guy called Whisper said something like:
>
>> John Phillips wrote:
>>> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>>>
>>> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
>>> their e-mail without permission?
>>>
>>> What is the penalty, if any?
>>>
>>> Roddles, do you know?
>>
>>
>> Gaol time usually, but if 1st offence you may get off with soft judge....
>
> Don't even get gaol time for growing dope (at least not the first 10
> times)
> and shooting people around here. Reading emails wouldn't make a mention...

No true unless you are a Labor voter. After all you have to be a dope or on
it to vote for Pete

[Ext User(Otter)]

In news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com,
John Phillips <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> typed:
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?

See Part 6, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/
, for NSW only. These are general offences, and other provisions might deal
with government (NSW or Commonwealth) matters.

The simplest provision of the kind to which you refer is this -

Unauthorised access to or modification of restricted data held in computer
(summary offence)

308H (1) A person:
(a) who causes any unauthorised access to or modification of restricted
data held in a computer, and
(b) who knows that the access or modification is unauthorised, and
(c) who intends to cause that access or modification,
is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years.
(2) An offence against this section is a summary offence.
(3) In this section:
"restricted data" means data held in a computer, being data to which
access is restricted by an access control system associated with a function
of the computer.

As you will see, the relevant information has to be "resticted data" for
there to be an offence.

[Ext User(MisterE)]

"John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?

I have come across this at my work where an employee acted on info in emails
that weren't to her.
It would have to be restricted and labelled as such. Otherwise it would have
to be labelled that you are not to act on its contents if it were not
addressed to you, and then you did act. It is not illegal to intercept
anyones email and read it and act on the info if it has not information
saying you shouldn't. In this case the person had set up a packet capture
and captureing all info including emails and nothing illegal was found, they
just broke the companies 'ethics' policy and when referred to police they
did nothing.

[Ext User(Otter)]

In news:45fa3405$0$9770$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ,
MisterE <voids@sometwher.world> typed:
> "John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
>> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>>
>> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
>> their e-mail without permission?
>>
>> What is the penalty, if any?
>>
>> Roddles, do you know?
>
> I have come across this at my work where an employee acted on info in
> emails that weren't to her.
> It would have to be restricted and labelled as such.

Incorrect.

> Otherwise it
> would have to be labelled that you are not to act on its contents if
> it were not addressed to you, and then you did act.

Incorrect.

> It is not illegal
> to intercept anyones email and read it and act on the info if it has
> not information saying you shouldn't.

Incorrect.

> In this case the person had set
> up a packet capture and captureing all info including emails and
> nothing illegal was found, they just broke the companies 'ethics'
> policy and when referred to police they did nothing.

There is a possible break in that chain of causation.

[Ext User(Hunter01)]

MisterE wrote:
>
> I have come across this at my work where an employee acted on info in emails
> that weren't to her.
> It would have to be restricted and labelled as such. Otherwise it would have
> to be labelled that you are not to act on its contents if it were not
> addressed to you, and then you did act. It is not illegal to intercept
> anyones email and read it and act on the info if it has not information
> saying you shouldn't. In this case the person had set up a packet capture
> and captureing all info including emails and nothing illegal was found, they
> just broke the companies 'ethics' policy and when referred to police they
> did nothing.


We're being told the opposite by our policy broker types, it's debatable
whether or not you can go through an employee's email even if you have a
"terms and conditions" that say it is the property of the place, and may
be checked read and otherwise looked at. Apparently privacy laws are
pretty damn extensive, and even with such a visible and agreed to policy
you could be in hot water for acting upon info obtained in such a way.
Apparently a very shadowy area at the moment that is wiser to lean to
the side of caution on.

[Ext User(John Phillips)]

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:49:48 +1100, "Otter" <konrad@lorenz.net> wrote:

>As you will see, the relevant information has to be "resticted data" for
>there to be an offence.

By being private data, would that constitute "restricted"?

[Ext User(Otter)]

In news:fv0lv2tvkju5o11ocvk3hsffmb028a1nns@4ax.com,
John Phillips <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> typed:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:49:48 +1100, "Otter" <konrad@lorenz.net> wrote:
>
>> As you will see, the relevant information has to be "resticted data"
>> for there to be an offence.
>
> By being private data, would that constitute "restricted"?

No, that has no legal significance. There is a specific definition of
"restricted data" - "restricted data" means data held in a computer, being
data to which access is restricted by an access control system associated
with a function of the computer.

[Ext User(Otter)]

In news:45fa7a76$0$30193$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au,
Hunter01 <hunter01@iinet.net.au> typed:
> MisterE wrote:
>>
>> I have come across this at my work where an employee acted on info
>> in emails that weren't to her.
>> It would have to be restricted and labelled as such. Otherwise it
>> would have to be labelled that you are not to act on its contents if
>> it were not addressed to you, and then you did act. It is not
>> illegal to intercept anyones email and read it and act on the info
>> if it has not information saying you shouldn't. In this case the
>> person had set up a packet capture and captureing all info including
>> emails and nothing illegal was found, they just broke the companies
>> 'ethics' policy and when referred to police they did nothing.
>
>
> We're being told the opposite by our policy broker types, it's
> debatable whether or not you can go through an employee's email even
> if you have a "terms and conditions" that say it is the property of
> the place, and may be checked read and otherwise looked at.
> Apparently privacy laws are pretty damn extensive, and even with such
> a visible and agreed to policy you could be in hot water for acting
> upon info obtained in such a way. Apparently a very shadowy area at
> the moment that is wiser to lean to the side of caution on.

Unfortunately for that position, employees don't have email. The employer
does. And if employees are so foolish as to have private email come to them
through their employer's email, they can hardly complain about any breach of
privacy where the business rules are explicitly spelt out.

[Ext User(will s)]

"John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>
> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
> their e-mail without permission?
>
> What is the penalty, if any?
>
> Roddles, do you know?


Yes. The person who owns the PC will be shot for not securing his computer.
Mate, if you forget to put the chastity belt on your wife then you deserve
the bastard you may end up with.

[Ext User(John Phillips)]

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 08:26:15 +1100, "will s" <willsjunk@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

> if you forget to put the chastity belt on your wife then you deserve
>the bastard you may end up with.

??????????

[Ext User(Otter)]

In news:45fb0b0d$0$16555$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u,
will s <willsjunk@optusnet.com.au> typed:
> "John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
>> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>>
>> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
>> their e-mail without permission?
>>
>> What is the penalty, if any?
>>
>> Roddles, do you know?
>
>
> Yes. The person who owns the PC will be shot for not securing his
> computer. Mate, if you forget to put the chastity belt on your wife
> then you deserve the bastard you may end up with.

Yes, but where do you buy your chastity belts?

[Ext User(SG1)]

"Otter" <konrad@lorenz.net> wrote in message
news:560ndiF26ssdmU1@mid.individual.net...
> In news:45fb0b0d$0$16555$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u,
> will s <willsjunk@optusnet.com.au> typed:
>> "John Phillips" <flatulantdingo@deadspam.com> wrote in message
>> news:hl8iv29m58mqtc0elv8cuh6t4vjvagltkp@4ax.com...
>>> Sorry if off topic for this list.
>>>
>>> Is it an offence for a person to open another person's pc, and read
>>> their e-mail without permission?
>>>
>>> What is the penalty, if any?
>>>
>>> Roddles, do you know?
>>
>>
>> Yes. The person who owns the PC will be shot for not securing his
>> computer. Mate, if you forget to put the chastity belt on your wife
>> then you deserve the bastard you may end up with.
>
> Yes, but where do you buy your chastity belts?

Call the BBC saw one on the Antiques Roadshow.