Seriously why would any company comply?
OK law will be law, so one simply makes a separate company which does not actually come under the IP Bill/law, and which is not subject to a technical capability notice which develops all new products. It has no obligation to notify. Then when launch arrives, it having prepared all the technical and marketing in advance, it tells the main company which is subject to a notice, and launches. Main company complies with law and tells government in advance of new product/service launch, 30 seconds in advance, but in advance, job done.
Many companies already develop new products and services with a degree of secrecy internally and externally, especially people like Apple, so this will simply add a legal layer of separation between R&D and product development and the main company. Simple step, easy, and makes the law on this totally fucking pointless.
Getting really really cross with UK Government wanting to spy one everyone now.
P.S. A&A are not subject to data retention or technical capability notices. Even so, we are agile enough that we will often launch a new service within days of coming up with the idea, so even complying with such laws will leave the government dragging their heels.
P.P.S Why would any foreign company comply with this bullshit anyway? They will have a UK subsidiary company which can be kept in the dark until actual launch.
P.S. A&A are not subject to data retention or technical capability notices. Even so, we are agile enough that we will often launch a new service within days of coming up with the idea, so even complying with such laws will leave the government dragging their heels.
P.P.S Why would any foreign company comply with this bullshit anyway? They will have a UK subsidiary company which can be kept in the dark until actual launch.
>>>>OK law will be law, so one simply makes a separate company which does not actually come under the IP Bill/law, and which is not subject to a technical capability notice which develops all new products. It has no obligation to notify. Then when launch arrives, it having prepared all the technical and marketing in advance, it tells the main company which is subject to a notice, and launches. Main company complies with law and tells government in advance of new product/service launch, 30 seconds in advance, but in advance, job done.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest here the case of Salomon v A Salomon & Co. might suggest this wont work. In this case the court refused to "pierce the corporate veil" (make the owner responsible for the company's obligations) as the company wasn't registered with any intent of fraud, etc but was instead registered in good faith.
I would suggest that registering a company for the sole intention of evading a technical capability notice would not be a good faith registration, and thus the obverse of Salomon would apply, allowing the corporate veil to be pierced.