Home Page ¦ Background Info ¦ Reports and publications ¦ Policy Issues ¦ News Items ¦ Press Releases ¦ Press Enquiries ¦ Mailing Lists ¦ Bookstore
CR&CL(UK) Memorandum for the Internet
Content Summit 1999, 09 September, 1999
"Open Letter on the controversial
Electronic Communications Bill sent to IBM and BT," 05
August, 1999
"A new report on chip privacy and
security measures has been published today," 08 July, 1999
"UK Crypto Policy Secrets
Revealed," 06 July, 1999
"Critical letter on the UK
Encryption policy sent to the Prime Minister," 15 June, 1999
"UK ISP found liable for
defamation," 26 March, 1999
CR&CL (UK) gives oral evidence at the
House of Commons, 09 March, 1999
"CR&CL (UK) issues a report on
Intel and privacy concerns," 24 February, 1999
"Civil Liberties organisation
questions the IWF review process," 10 February, 1999
"UK ISPA Give Police Secret
Briefing," 01 February, 1999
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) Press Release
CR&CL(UK) Memorandum for the Internet Content Summit 1999
09 September, 1999
MUNICH - Today Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) published a four page Memorandum in Munich, Germany to coincide with the Internet Content Summit 1999 organised by the Bertelsmann Foundation.
This memorandum contains the recommendations of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) in relation to proposals by the industry for the “self regulation of Internet content” during the Munich Internet Content Summit 1999.
The Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) Memorandum states that “any approach to Internet content including self-regulatory initiatives on an international level should be open and transparent.” According to the Memorandum, “such initiatives should not only include the representatives of the Internet industry which is more concerned about protecting its financial interests. The rights of the individual Internet users should be respected and represented within all the initiatives.”
In relation to the development of industry codes of conducts, CR&CL(UK) recommends that: “in all facets of their business, the ISPs and content providers should recognise that the European Convention on Human Rights (and other international agreements) enshrines the rights to freedom of expression, privacy and access to information. Therefore, the ISPs and content providers should safeguard and positively encourage these fundamental values with respect to online usage within the codes of conduct that may be developed.”
According to Mr. Yaman Akdeniz, director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) who is attending the Internet Content Summit in Munich:
“Internet content regulation remains as a politically sensitive issue. However, the industry proposals for self-regulation remains debatable and not completely acceptable by civil liberties organisations. For example, where third party content is involved, the ISP must take due account of the freedoms and rights of others and not just considerations of commercial interest or political convenience.”
“Furthermore, actions taken by the self-regulatory bodies for the protection of children from illegal activities should not be Internet or medium specific and should aim to protect children from real life dangers and should aim to improve the lives of children rather than aiming to clean up the Internet.”
Notes for the Editors
Contact Information
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights &
Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 0498-865116, dial +44 498 865116 if you are abroad.
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) Press Release
"Open Letter on the controversial Electronic Communications Bill sent to IBM and BT"
05 August, 1999
LEEDS - Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) published an open letter directed to IBM and BT in relation to the controversial draft Electronic Communications Bill. Both BT and IBM have recently been parties to a government sponsored study in the UK that has led to new proposals for the relationship between electronic commerce, encryption and law enforcement.
The open letter which was sent to chief executive officers of both IBM and BT describes the law enforcement measures of the draft Bill as "pernicious and draconian" and states that:
"The proposals that have emerged from this work, in which your representatives were involved, are beneficial to the extent that they have removed the immediate threat of key escrow. But worrying provisions remain for government access to decryption keys and these will have serious privacy and civil rights consequences if they persist in their current form."
The letter concludes by seeking the support of IBM and BT "in opposing measures that would provide for UK Government access to the personal decryption keys used by UK citizens to protect their privacy, safety and security."
While launching the public version of the IBM/BT letter, Dr. Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Advisor for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"The UK Government’s draft Electronic Communications Bill has more to do with Government Access to Keys (‘GAK’) than it does with the promotion of electronic commerce. In its current form it will have a serious, detrimental impact on the privacy, safety, security and civil rights of honest, law abiding UK Internet users. All companies should consider these proposals with caution if the wish to retain the trust and confidence of the UK public."
Mr. Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"Public confidence is vital for electronic commerce. IBM and BT will damage public confidence in the security of electronic commerce if they align themselves with oppressive and unnecessary schemes for government access to decryption keys."
Mr. Yaman Akdeniz, director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) added:
"Without public confidence and support there will never be an environment for e-commerce. The law enforcement measures of the draft Bill raise serious concerns for civil liberties and personal rights such as privacy. The industry should think twice before backing these draconian proposals."
Notes for the Editors
Contact Information
[For this release the main contact person is Dr. Brian Gladman]
Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01905 748990, dial +44 1905 748990 if you are abroad.
E-mail: brg@cyber-rights.org
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01279 871272, dial +44 1279 871272 if you are abroad.
E-mail: nbohm@cyber-rights.org
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights &
Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 0498-865116, dial +44 498 865116 if you are abroad.
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
Professor Clive Walker, Deputy Director
Telephone: +44 (0) 113 2335033
E-mail: law6cw@cyber-rights.org
Dr. Louise Ellison, Deputy Director
Telephone: +44 (0) 118 9875123 (ext: 7507)
E-mail: lawlee@cyber-rights.org
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) Press Release
A new report on chip privacy and security measures has been published today
08 July, 1999
LEEDS - Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) today published a new report entitled "Could New Chip Privacy and Security Measures Tie Users’ Hands?" This new report is a follow up to the February 1999 Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK), "Report on the Intel PIII Processor Serial Number Feature," and reviews some possible features of future chips, and calls for effective advance consultation about their implications.
Mr. Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"Mistrust in the Internet is already known to be hampering the growth of electronic commerce. Chip makers could extend that mistrust to PCs unless they can achieve openness in their approach to security."
Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser for Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"Direct processor support for security and privacy promises real improvements for PC owners and users provided that the mechanisms employed are secure and are seen to be secure. An approach that provides for open, independent, publicly accountable, international scrutiny of the design, implementation, operation and control of such mechanisms will be an essential step in meeting the interests of users world-wide."
Notes for the Editors
Contact Information
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01279 871272, dial +44 1279 871272 if you are abroad.
E-mail: nbohm@cyber-rights.org
Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01905 748990, dial +44 1905 748990 if you are abroad.
E-mail: brg@cyber-rights.org
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) Press Release
"UK Crypto Policy Secrets Revealed"
06 July, 1999
LEEDS - Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) today launched a new section called Freedom of Information through its web pages at http://www.cyber-rights.org/foia/. To inaugurate this new section, we are revealing the secretive process in which UK Government policy was influenced by the US Government between November 1996 and January 1997 just before the March 1997 DTI Consultation paper was launched.
The documents that are released today detail the US Crypto Czar David Aaron’s visit to the UK and these are obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act by the Washington DC based Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://www.epic.org).
Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"In the absence of a Freedom of Information Act, so far, it has not been possible to obtain any documents from the DTI under the Open Government Code of Conduct in relation to the formulation of UK Government policy on encryption. The Aaron files clearly show that the UK government policy was closely co-ordinated with the US despite the claims of a recent Cabinet Office paper which stated that ‘there has been remarkably little co-ordination of policy on encryption matters’ at an international level."
Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser for Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"These documents expose just a few of the many international exchanges undertaken in the development of government encryption policies. This is just the ‘tip of the iceberg’ and raises the serious concern that the recent UK Government claim that ‘there has been remarkably little co-ordination of policy on encryption matters’ is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public about the true nature and real intent of UK Government actions in this field."
"These documents show that Ambassador David Aaron played the role of a high-tech Johnny Appleseed, travelling the world in First Class to promote US Government key escrow and surveillance policies. The UK is one of the few countries that Aaron was welcomed and the US policy adopted," added David Banisar, Senior Fellow for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based public interest group that sued the US government in 1998 under the US Freedom of Information Act to obtain the documents.
Notes for the Editors
For Immediate Release - 15 June, 1999
"Critical letter on the UK Encryption policy sent to the Prime Minister"
LEEDS - In a letter sent to the Prime Minister, the Board Members of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) criticised the recently published Cabinet Office Report entitled Encryption and Law Enforcement. The letter states that "while we welcome this report as an initial step, we are concerned to find that it places too much emphasis on the value of encryption in support of business interests whilst giving insufficient attention to the interests and concerns of consumers and private citizens."
The letter (which is available through http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/blair-letter.htm) also stated that the board members of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) are surprised and concerned about the legislative proposals that the Cabinet Office report contains, which seem to propose steps that could remove important civil rights and protections.
Dr. Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"The absence of any coverage of cryptography export controls and their detrimental impact on electronic commerce is a surprising and serious omission. This appears to be an attempt on the part of Government to divert attention from an area where their ongoing actions are totally inconsistent with their stated aim of promoting electronic commerce."
Mr. Nicholas Bohm,E-Commerce Policy Adviser for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) added that:
"It would be a grave embarrassment, both for the Government and for Britain’s position in the world of electronic commerce, for the Government’s E-Commerce Bill to be found inconsistent with the Human Rights Act."
Mr. Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) concluded that:
"The joint government industry forum is a step in the right direction. However, it will only succeed if representation is widened to include representatives from consumer, civil liberties and public interest bodies in order to ensure that the interests of UK citizens are fully recognised, represented, and protected. Public accountability, openness and transparency will also be essential if such a forum is to command the trust and confidence of the UK public."
Notes for the Editors
Contact Information
Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01905 748990, dial +44 1905 748990 if you are abroad.
E-mail: brg@cyber-rights.org
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 01279 871272, dial +44 1279 871272 if you are abroad.
E-mail: nbohm@cyber-rights.org
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights &
Cyber-Liberties (UK)
Telephone: 0498-865116, dial +44 498 865116 if you are abroad.
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
For Immediate Release - 26 March, 1999
CR&CL (UK) Press Release - UK ISP found liable for defamation
LEEDS - This morning Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) criticised a High Court ruling involving liability for defamatory statements made by a third party against Demon Internet.
Demon Internet, a major UK ISP is more likely to be found liable for defamation in a case against Dr. Laurence Godfrey, a London-based nuclear physicist. Demon will appeal against today’s pre-trial court ruling by Mr Justice Morland in London’s High Court.
According to a press release by Demon Internet, "the point of law being decided centres around whether Demon Internet, an Internet Service Provider, is responsible for the information that is posted to and made available from newsgroups that are held on Demon Internet’s servers." It should also be noted that the case arises out of a posting made by an unknown individual in the US, and not by a Demon Internet customer.
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) believes that this decision will have a profound effect on cyber-speech and UK ISPs will be forced to monitor and censor third party content going through their servers. The ruling, if not reversed on appeal would make Britain, a very hostile place for network development in the Information Age.
Mr. Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"The decision will have a chilling effect over the Internet communications and will force the UK ISPs to take a pro-active role in relation to Internet content. This is most undesirable and unacceptable. The Defamation Act does not give adequate protection to the ISPs and unfortunately the ISPs remain as the ‘usual suspects’ when civil claims through defamation suits are brought against them."
"It is also totally unacceptable that an offended party should simply notify an Internet Service Provider claiming the information to be legally defamatory. The current state of the UK laws forces the ISPs to be the defendant, judge, and the jury at the same time. Notice should not be enough in such cases."
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) will support Demon’s case during the appeal process.
Contact Information:
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, Director of Cyber-Rights &
Cyber-Liberties (UK)
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
CR&CL (UK) gives oral evidence at the House of Commons
09 March, 1999
LONDON, House of Commons - Today Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) told the HC Select Committee on Trade and Industry that "so far, privacy issues in relation to the use of strong encryption systems have never been properly reflected in the formulation of UK government policies." This silence is especially remarkable in the light of other governmental initiatives such as the Human Rights Act 1998 according to the oral evidence given by the Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) representatives.
Furthermore, the Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) written submission stated that "the use of encryption should be prima facie respected and even encouraged. By contrast, the government approach should be criticised as being fixated on the value of encryption solely in connection with commerce and ignoring wider political and social uses of information technology which might legitimately require the use of encryption."
"Without the "key recovery" capability, law enforcement agencies contend that they would be less able to protect the safety of the public, and this in itself would constitute an infringement of civil liberties. However, we believe that the solution to the problems of crime prevention and law enforcement do not lie with accessing private encryption keys. From our own research into recorded criminal uses of encryption, we have concluded that the use of encryption has not been a serious problem for crime detection or prevention. There is no more than speculation that it will be a problem in the future. In any event, it seems fanciful to expect that criminals will use government-mandated encryption systems with key recovery capabilities when alternative systems of encryption remain readily available. Government strategy would be naive if it assumed that criminals would use encryption tools which can be decrypted by the law enforcement bodies."
The Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) representatives will also bring a recently published Council of Europe Recommendation "for the Protection of Privacy on the Internet," (No R (99) 5 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States, http://www.coe.fr/cm/ta/rec/1999/99r5.htm) to the attention of the Trade and Select Committee. These excellent guidelines are along the lines of CR&CL(UK)’s approach to individual privacy and drafting of a "privacy letter" from the users perspective.
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, the Director of CR&CL(UK) stated that:
"The enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 within the UK is a major step towards a new era in which individual rights and liberties will be strongly respected and taken into account while government policies are fostered. We believe privacy is far the most important right which needs protection in the Information Age and it should be the duty of the government to protect such individual rights."
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser to CR&CL(UK) stated that:
"Recent Government announcements have shown that industry and privacy lobbies are working in the same direction. But the Select Committee has the chance to show that standing up for individual liberty and privacy in cyberspace is just as important as supporting commerce and industry."
Dr Brian Gladman, the Technology Policy Adviser to CR&CL(UK) stated that:
""Law Enforcement authorities need to overcome their fear of encryption and their desire for solutions that create more risks for society than they remove. Instead, they need to invest in the development of the expertise needed to remain effective in a future environment where cryptographic information protection will be the norm."
Professor Clive Walker, deputy director of CR&CL(UK) added:
"In a democratic society, police powers must be open, workable and fair. These principles will not be achieved by dealings behind closed doors between the police and Internet Service Providers nor by future wide-ranging legal powers to access private correspondence. There is insufficient evidence that encryption is the computer equivalent of a sawn-off shotgun and that its users need to be potentially treated as if they were a virtual community of masked villains."
Notes for the Editors
For immediate release: 13:00 GMT, 24 February, 1999
CR&CL (UK) issues a report on Intel and privacy concerns
LEEDS - Today Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) publishes its report on the Intel PIII Processor Serial Number Feature. The report written by Dr Brian Gladman, Technology Policy Adviser to Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) criticises Intel for introducing security features on the new Intel PIII chip without adequate or timely public consultation. The report calls for a change in policy for such features, which should in future involve open consultation on time scales which allow concerns about their operation and use to be resolved. The report, furthermore, proposes a new way forward, including important recommendations for Intel, PC Manufacturers, Suppliers, Retailers, Software (and Web/Internet Service) Suppliers, and PC Owners (especially Consumers and Home Users).
The report which is available through (a copy of the report is attached at the end of this press release) <http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/intel-rep.htm> states that:
"CR&CL(UK) does not have any doubts about Intel’s desire to improve security for its customers. We are, however, surprised to be faced with a ‘fait accompli’ on such an important issue. We are also surprised to be put in this position by a company that has a global influence on the safety, the security and the privacy of millions of consumers. We simply cannot accept that such steps should be taken without the widest possible public consultation."
Dr Brian Gladman, the Technology Policy Adviser to CR&CL(UK) who co-ordinated the CR&CL(UK) strategy in relation to Intel PIII privacy and security issues stated that:
"While I feel sure that Intel is genuine in wanting to improve security for its end users, the company needs to be more open about their approach and more willing to involve the wider community at a much earlier stage in their thinking in order to avoid the misunderstandings and concerns that have so clearly been the result of their PIII announcement"
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, the Director of CR&CL(UK) stated that:
" We are concerned with the impact of this new technology on privacy. Our report is critical and constructive at the same time. We hope, Intel, the computer industry, and the consumers will take into account our recommendations."
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser to CR&CL(UK) added:
"Serial numbering of chips, under the owner's control, could offer some useful benefits. But it could also be helpful to repressive regimes in taking action against dissidents who use the Internet to promote democracy and human rights causes. And if software vendors tried to tie licences to individual processors as an anti-piracy technique, it could lead to awkward practical problems for users wanting to upgrade processors or run on a backup system. Intel do not seem to have thought through the implications of their plans for the PIII chip."
Notes for the Media:
Contact Information
Dr Brian Gladman, Crypto Technology Policy Adviser,
Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
E-mail: brg@cyber-rights.org
Mr Yaman Akdeniz,
Drector of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
Mr Nicholas Bohm,
E-Commerce Policy Adviser, Cyber Rights & Cyber-Liberties
(UK)
E-mail: nbohm@cyber-rights.org
For Immediate Release - 10 February, 1999
Civil Liberties organisation questions the IWF review process
LEEDS - Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) today criticised the review process of the Internet Watch Foundation.
The DTI Home Office Minister published yesterday a report on the Internet Watch Foundation (see http://www.dti.gov.uk/iwfreview). The report commends the success of the IWF since its inception in 1996, and makes recommendations for improvement to keep pace with the rapid developments taking place in the Internet industry.
The review involved all activities of the Internet Watch Foundation including the IWF as a hotline for reporting illegal content, and IWF as a policy making body with its involvement with the development of rating and filtering systems.
However, according to Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK), the initial scope of the review and the terms of reference for the review of the Internet Watch Foundation were carefully limited to "removal of illegal material" and its function as a hotline but not its function as a policy making body.
The public was asked to express its opinions of the IWF and its work, and on the matter of illegal and obscene material (particularly child pornography) on the Internet through the web site at http://www.kpmgiwf.org/ but this review did not involve seeking comments on the regulatory functions of the IWF.
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) was only contacted by the reviewing bodies in relation to hotline function of the Internet Watch Foundation and commented that:
"The figures provided by the hotline tell us little as the actual amount of child pornography on the Internet is unknown. It is, therefore, difficult to judge how successful the UK hotline has been despite the claims by the government bodies that it has been. Another downside is that the efforts of the organisation are concentrated on the newsgroups carried by the UK ISPs. This means that while illegal material is removed from the UK ISPs servers, the same material will continue to be available on the Internet carried by the foreign ISPs in their own servers. Therefore, the expensive monitoring of the Internet at a national level is of limited value."
Yaman Akdeniz, director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) and the author of two "Who Watches the Watchmen" reports which were critical of the activities of the IWF said that:
"Although the IWF acts as a private self regulatory body, its actions directly involve public matters and the IWF is involved with the UK government’s policy making process. No decisions should be taken without proper public consultation and an open and transparent environment should be established for regulatory initiatives in the field of Internet regulation rather than important policies being developed by unaccountable bodies such as the IWF."
Notes For the Media:
UK ISPA Give Police Secret Briefing, 01 February, 1999
Leeds- Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) has discovered that the Internet Service Providers Association ("ISPA") last year gave a secret briefing to the Association of Chief Police Officers ("ACPO") about the ISP industry capabilities for the provision of information to the police about their customers. This new "Who Watches the Watchmen" report therefore brings into the open what your ISP can do for the police with your Internet account.
The publication of this new report entitled "Who Watches the Watchmen: Part III - ISP Capabilities for the Provision of Personal Information to the Police," (http://www.cyber-rights.org/privacy/watchmen-iii.htm) follows the development of a "privacy letter" from the consumer’s perspective by the Leeds based organisation, and an exchange of letters between Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) and the ACPO/ISPs and the Government Forum in December 1998.
Mr Yaman Akdeniz (lawya@cyber-rights.org), director of Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) stated that:
"With all these possibilities and capabilities for the provisions of information through the ISPs to the police, the ISPA runs the risk of becoming the Big Brother Providers Association. The leaked report shows that our concerns were fully justified, and that secrecy, rather than ‘media disinformation’ was at work with the activities of the ACPO/ISPs Forum."
Mr Nicholas Bohm (nbohm@cyber-rights.org), E-Commerce Policy Adviser for Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK) added:
"The police need help to understand how to deal with Internet crime, and ISPA is of course free to give them that help. But ISPs also have responsibilities to their customers, and for ISPA to produce a report in secret for the benefit of the police is bound to send out completely the wrong message. ISPA should have been open about it, so that there can be proper debate and public understanding of the difficult issues involved. Getting the best out of the Internet depends on public confidence in it and its operators, and secret reports are no way to build confidence."
The new Watchmen report concludes that "transparency, openness and accountability are important features of a healthy society. We believe it is now time for the Government through the Parliament to intervene in the activities of the ACPO/ISPs, Government Forum and clarify these matters including the laws in relation to interception of communications and the relevant procedures."
Notes for the Media:
Contact Information:
Mr Yaman Akdeniz, director
Address: Centre For Criminal Justice Studies, University of
Leeds, LS2 9JT.
Direct Telephone: +44 113 2335033
Fax: 0113- 2335056
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
Mr Nicholas Bohm, E-Commerce Policy Adviser,
Phone: 01279 871272 (+44 1279 871272)
Fax: 01279 870215 (+44 1279 870215)
E-mail: nbohm@cyber-rights.org