Communications Data Bill is suffering from a communications ...

COMMENT

The UK government has not approached Facebook about whether the social-networking company will have to provide information about user communications under the proposed Communciations Data Bill.

This inaction highlights the huge challenge the bill poses for internet service providers, and other UK businesses.

Facebook provides webmail and instant messaging services, and has over 31 million users in the UK - communications services in most people's eyes. Yet the government has chosen not to approach Facebook about what obligations it may face under the so-called'Snoopers' Charter': it has not been contacted either officially or unofficially by the government about whether it will be classed as a 'communications services provider' under the proposed law, Facebook director of public policy Richard Allan told ZDNet UK at an event in parliament on Thursday.

"We need to look at [the bill], and we need to figure out what's going on." said Allan. "We genuinely haven't seen anything [from the government] before today."

It's an interesting move on the government's behalf, given the question of jurisdiction. Facebook's EMEA headquarters is in Dublin, and messaging data from Facebook Mail and Chat could be held in one of a number of datacentres around the world, leaving the company outside of the bill's UK jurisdiction. Facebook would be well within its rights to answer any UK police request for communications data made under the legislation with a polite but firm denial on the grounds of cost.

It is also interesting that Allan made his comments an event held by Julian Huppert, one of the MPs leading the charge against the bill, and attended by a number of civil rights organisations, indicating that Facebook is at least curious about the civil liberties implications of the legislation.

Should Facebook feel the privacy burden of complying with the bill too great, it already has a get-out through the jurisdiction issue, as do almost all of the biggest companies who provide what are de facto communications platforms: Google, Twitter, World of Warcraft to name but three.

This leaves the UK's internet service providers, firmly and undeniably within the UK's jurisdiction, carrying the burden for the government's plans. Yet the government has been reticent in officially talking to them too about the plans and the trade body representing ISPs, the ISPA, has since come out against the legislation.

Businesses too could see themselves forced to monitor communications under the bill.

Businesses too could see themselves forced to monitor communications under the bill: the way the legislation is currently worded, any organisation carrying network traffic could be classed as a telecommunications provider by an order from the home secretary.

This could see businesses having to not only retain communications data in an accessible form, but also assist the police, intelligence services, and HMRC in data-mining operations. Yet, seemingly, no overtures have been made to businesses about their potential obligations as communications service providers, nor conversely has the government tried to reassure them that they will not be classified in this way and fall under the bill's remit.

For a bill devoted to communications, there has been precious little communication from the government, with Facebook, ISPs and businesses not officially consulted on the plans. And it shows: it will be painfully easy for those with an interest in hiding their communications or avoiding their duties under the bill to use simple methods, such as encryption and anonymisation technologies, in order to do so.

This is clearly an unpopular piece of legislation, and the government seems to know it. Why try to reach out to interested parties to build consensus around the legislation, when none can be built?

In time-honoured tradition, the government opted to have a veneer of communication with a consultation about communications data, then ignored all views that didn't chime with its own. Facebook being left out of the loop not only throws into sharp relief the burden that will fall on ISPs, but also the government's apparent disregard for the views of civil society over the Communications Data Bill.

ron burgundy millennial media nit championship transcendentalism bells palsy channel 5 news uc berkeley