Forum
»
Cheating ho wants to fukk - the final chapter
04-17-2011, 04:43 PM
-
#3811
- Softworn
- Glow Supremacist
-
- Softworn
- Glow Supremacist
- Join Date: Dec 2007
- Posts: 20,674
- Rep Power: 32807
-
-
Originally Posted By envio⏩
ok, this is 100% illegal and i can reference both statute and case law
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individuals personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individuals personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."

🤡 Honk-Pilled 🤡
🏎️ Race-Pilled 🏎️
04-17-2011, 04:44 PM
-
#3812
04-17-2011, 04:45 PM
-
#3813
04-17-2011, 04:45 PM
-
#3814
- cantwait2lift
- thegoodthebadtherustled
-
- cantwait2lift
- thegoodthebadtherustled
- Join Date: Jul 2009
- Location: Canada
- Age: 37
- Posts: 3,074
- Rep Power: 12642
-
-
Originally Posted By der8auer⏩
reppedYa man. Took me last 1,5h to do this. Thanks bro
-engineering brah-
***Canadian Crew***
Bench 330
Squat 460
Deadlift 625
04-17-2011, 04:45 PM
-
#3815
04-17-2011, 04:46 PM
-
#3816
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
-
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
- Join Date: Apr 2010
- Posts: 19,131
- Rep Power: 6014
-
-
Originally Posted By redheadlaw7⏩
In B4 you star Ya Boy Dave's next videoBest friend. BF+best friend.
RIP mainsqueeze530
"Rustle your opponents jimmies from afar." - Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Mods - I don't have multiple accounts, asked for old accounts be banned, never had two open at one time.
Misc - you don't have to rep me back lol, in return no rep begging pls tx
04-17-2011, 04:46 PM
-
#3817
04-17-2011, 04:47 PM
-
#3818
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
-
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
- Join Date: Apr 2010
- Posts: 19,131
- Rep Power: 6014
-
-
Originally Posted By bereal23⏩
thisthishtiswhat about the death threats from her? Wouldn't that potential case against her be enough for her to leave this alone?
RIP mainsqueeze530
"Rustle your opponents jimmies from afar." - Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Mods - I don't have multiple accounts, asked for old accounts be banned, never had two open at one time.
Misc - you don't have to rep me back lol, in return no rep begging pls tx
04-17-2011, 04:48 PM
-
#3819
- ira_est_a_donum
- Registered User
-
- ira_est_a_donum
- Registered User
- Join Date: Feb 2008
- Posts: 5,093
- Rep Power: 3605
-
-
how the fuk is she gonna blame YBD for her not having a place to live and getting kicked out... she is the one who opened her legs and decided to cheat... LOL... she didnt take one ounce of credit for her role in this whole deal...
dont open legs while engaged=stay engaged and have a place to live...
and if I was her dad I would ask her wtf she was doing having a 3 some with random guys while being engaged.... slap her and tell her she got what she deserves....
dont open legs while engaged=stay engaged and have a place to live...
and if I was her dad I would ask her wtf she was doing having a 3 some with random guys while being engaged.... slap her and tell her she got what she deserves....
04-17-2011, 04:48 PM
-
#3820
Originally Posted By envio⏩
Strong e-lawyer, they simply dismissed her evidence because it was illegal to 'wiretap' the meeting.ok, this is 100% illegal and i can reference both statute and case law
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individuals personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individuals personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."
By the way, posting on internet forum is a recreational activity. In video no face is shown, if she wants to contest that so video can be public on news outlets with her real face next to it, she can go ahead.
'03 OG, YOU JELLY? 3K+
==++FOUNDER OF MARLENE HAS A FUPA CLUB++====
04-17-2011, 04:49 PM
-
#3821
04-17-2011, 04:49 PM
-
#3822
- cantwait2lift
- thegoodthebadtherustled
-
- cantwait2lift
- thegoodthebadtherustled
- Join Date: Jul 2009
- Location: Canada
- Age: 37
- Posts: 3,074
- Rep Power: 12642
-
-
Originally Posted By ira_est_a_donum⏩
i wish you were my fatherhow the fuk is she gonna blame YBD for her not having a place to live and getting kicked out... she is the one who opened her legs and decided to cheat... LOL... she didnt take one ounce of credit for her role in this whole deal...
dont open legs while engaged=stay engaged and have a place to live...
and if I was her dad I would ask her wtf she was doing having a 3 some with random guys while being engaged.... slap her and tell her she got what she deserves....
dont open legs while engaged=stay engaged and have a place to live...
and if I was her dad I would ask her wtf she was doing having a 3 some with random guys while being engaged.... slap her and tell her she got what she deserves....
-engineering brah-
***Canadian Crew***
Bench 330
Squat 460
Deadlift 625
04-17-2011, 04:50 PM
-
#3823
Originally Posted By envio⏩
LOLok, this is 100% illegal and i can reference both statute and case law
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."
data protection act s36 - recording in your own home without consent is legalonly for the purposes of that individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational purposes)
extract from an article on a case (full article below, important parts bold)
exemption in section 36 that applies when recordings like this are used for domestic purposes. This exemption excludes all of the data protection principles and rights, and applies, for example, when parents take their video cameras to record their children's performance in a school play.
But, he said, as soon as the recording was published online it is ineligible for the "'domestic purposes" exemption because of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a case involving Mrs Bodil Lindqvist in Sweden.
The ECJ stated: "That [domestic purpose] exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people."
But it wasn't uploaded to youtube and it wasn't uploaded to any viewing site, wasn't it uploaded to a file hosting site and then the link was intercepted by computer hackers and posted all over the internet? He put it on the site to be able to hold it in the 'cloud' (cloud computing). IT was never intended to be public so it wouldn't fall under the law since it was not really distributed? Or he had no intent on distributing
yolo
tuf
04-17-2011, 04:51 PM
-
#3824
Originally Posted By VTheKing⏩
Scoucers cant handle the truth once again so they decide to boycott, classicTo clarify YBD's reluctance - the Sun covered the Hillsborough disaster 20 years ago, where about 100 people and 100's were injured because of a human crush at a Liverpool game. The tabloid alleged in the headlines that Liverpool fans were looting dead bodies, abusing dead girls and pissing on cops and the injured - whereas fans in attendance were testified to have fully cooperated with the police and helped the injured. I can't think of an American equivalent for the incident, but Liverpool folks have boycotted the Sun since then.
/google
04-17-2011, 04:55 PM
-
#3825
- HyDrOKoG
- Registered User
-
- HyDrOKoG
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2010
- Location: Brewton, Alabama, United States
- Age: 38
- Posts: 67
- Rep Power: 181
-
-
Definitely deserves a thread of the year nomination.
That whore is like the Monica Lewinsky of the misc forums now, probably half of the UK soon aswell. Except this girl won't write a book or be seen on national television. ( my comparison is solely based on shamefulness and embarassment. )
That whore is like the Monica Lewinsky of the misc forums now, probably half of the UK soon aswell. Except this girl won't write a book or be seen on national television. ( my comparison is solely based on shamefulness and embarassment. )
04-17-2011, 04:57 PM
-
#3826
- envio
- Registered User
-
- envio
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2009
- Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Age: 37
- Posts: 156
- Rep Power: 214
-
-
what about the death threats from her? Wouldn't that potential case against her be enough for her to leave this alone?
link to/cliffs on death threats?Originally Posted By NewEgo⏩
ive never said im a lawyer, im a law student in my final yearStrong e-lawyer, they simply dismissed her evidence because it was illegal to 'wiretap' the meeting.
By the way, posting on internet forum is a recreational activity. In video no face is shown, if she wants to contest that so video can be public on news outlets with her real face next to it, she can go ahead.
By the way, posting on internet forum is a recreational activity. In video no face is shown, if she wants to contest that so video can be public on news outlets with her real face next to it, she can go ahead.
the article clearly states, the "exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people"
the exception is s36 of the data protection act
is does not apply to data publicated on the internet
so to break that down, despite being recorded in the privacy of YBD's home it was no longer an exception under s36 once he released it on the internet
Originally Posted By NWDub⏩
haha, good manLOL
But it wasn't uploaded to youtube and it wasn't uploaded to any viewing site, wasn't it uploaded to a file hosting site and then the link was intercepted by computer hackers and posted all over the internet? He put it on the site to be able to hold it in the 'cloud' (cloud computing). IT was never intended to be public so it wouldn't fall under the law since it was not really distributed? Or he had no intent on distributing
But it wasn't uploaded to youtube and it wasn't uploaded to any viewing site, wasn't it uploaded to a file hosting site and then the link was intercepted by computer hackers and posted all over the internet? He put it on the site to be able to hold it in the 'cloud' (cloud computing). IT was never intended to be public so it wouldn't fall under the law since it was not really distributed? Or he had no intent on distributing
04-17-2011, 04:59 PM
-
#3827
- TBProdigy
- Morality Crusader
-
- TBProdigy
- Morality Crusader
- Join Date: Nov 2010
- Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 5,256
- Rep Power: 258
-
-
What is the max punishment dave could get if she sued, what charges could she file for??
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can and wisdom to know the difference.
04-17-2011, 05:00 PM
-
#3828
04-17-2011, 05:01 PM
-
#3829
04-17-2011, 05:03 PM
-
#3830
- redheadlaw7
- Dirty bulker.
-
- redheadlaw7
- Dirty bulker.
- Join Date: Jun 2009
- Location: Ohio, United States
- Age: 53
- Posts: 15,231
- Rep Power: 38649
-
-
Originally Posted By MrDelts⏩
What? I have a best friend that's a lawyer. I'm pretty sure the hubby doesn't mind seeing as my best friend was my "man of honor" in our wedding and is a godparent of one of my kids. He lives 3 states away and is married with kids. Oh noes. Don't let my big secret out!!!strong lies, arent you pregnant?
04-17-2011, 05:03 PM
-
#3831
- deep_brown
- Registered User
-
- deep_brown
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Posts: 279
- Rep Power: 344
-
-
lol strong frauding about dad being club owner, in b4 he owns a book shop and this is him coming to kneecap tongarcondav


04-17-2011, 05:04 PM
-
#3832
04-17-2011, 05:06 PM
-
#3833
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
-
- godsangina2
- ♫ ♪ ♫ ♫ ♪
- Join Date: Apr 2010
- Posts: 19,131
- Rep Power: 6014
-
-
Originally Posted By envio⏩
Not murder but very srs assult threats:link to/cliffs on death threats?


ive never said im a lawyer, im a law student in my final year
the article clearly states, the "exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people"
the exception is s36 of the data protection act
is does not apply to data publicated on the internet
so to break that down, despite being recorded in the privacy of YBD's home it was no longer an exception under s36 once he released it on the internet
Yeah I read the act and under section 55 he's liable to be fined, it doesn't specify how much money he could be fined, what do they usually fine private individuals in cases like this?the article clearly states, the "exception must therefore be interpreted as relating only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people"
the exception is s36 of the data protection act
is does not apply to data publicated on the internet
so to break that down, despite being recorded in the privacy of YBD's home it was no longer an exception under s36 once he released it on the internet
RIP mainsqueeze530
"Rustle your opponents jimmies from afar." - Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Mods - I don't have multiple accounts, asked for old accounts be banned, never had two open at one time.
Misc - you don't have to rep me back lol, in return no rep begging pls tx
04-17-2011, 05:06 PM
-
#3834
- burnedfish
- I have to souls
-
- burnedfish
- I have to souls
- Join Date: Apr 2009
- Age: 43
- Posts: 2,837
- Rep Power: 4447
-
-
Originally Posted By redheadlaw7⏩
That's funny, cause I just called my bf at Cambridge, and she says there's no possible way YBD would be in legal troubleWhat? I have a best friend that's a lawyer. I'm pretty sure the hubby doesn't mind seeing as my best friend was my "man of honor" in our wedding and is a godparent of one of my kids. He lives 3 states away and is married with kids. Oh noes. Don't let my big secret out!!!

[Official] San Diego Brah
Ducks eat for free at Subway
04-17-2011, 05:07 PM
-
#3835
- BulmersOriginal
- brb curling in squat rack
-
- BulmersOriginal
- brb curling in squat rack
- Join Date: May 2010
- Posts: 1,111
- Rep Power: 301
-
-
loving the new pic with Tony:


"Stop whining!"
-Arnold Schwarzenegger
04-17-2011, 05:09 PM
-
#3836
04-17-2011, 05:10 PM
-
#3837
04-17-2011, 05:11 PM
-
#3838
04-17-2011, 05:12 PM
-
#3839
- D3th 2 Aw3
- Vicious Traditions
-
- D3th 2 Aw3
- Vicious Traditions
- Join Date: Sep 2008
- Location: Canada
- Age: 35
- Posts: 5,212
- Rep Power: 6646
-
-

It's consistency. It's like building a house. Everyday I'm putting a brick on my wall.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
