Re: Stepney: "Someone Else Leaked the Data"

On Jul 31, 1:49 pm, "Dave Baker" <D...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

No it couldn't. There is no such thing as 'UK industrial espionage law' and
there are no rights in UK law (AFAIK) in respect of corporate intellectual
property that apply to anyone other than employees and contractors of the
claimant company as defined in the contracts they have signed to.


I didn't know this and I work for Brit firm. I guess that is why they
made me sign about twenty onerous documents relating to their IP.

Coughlan is not contractually bound to Ferrari in any way and the
information that fell into his lap does not constitute theft, 'industrial
espionage' (whatever the hell that is) or anything else with a possibility
of criminal sanction. You can be sure that if it did the police would have
been involved by now and it's clear that they have not.

and we all know far too much about the civil charges Ferrari

are bringing.

So again, I respectfully disagree.

As I've said, on several occasions, the only civil claim Ferrari could make
against Coughlan is breach of copyright if the data was published and it
appears this did not happen. We aren't yet privy to the details of claim
Ferrari are alleged to have made so I'll wait and see what they are actually
claiming. Far from knowing 'far too much' about it we as yet know bugger
all.

I'm sorry but the sheer amount of uninformed pseudo-legal waffle that
infests these threads is staggering and frankly doing my head in. Whatever
the morals and ethics of the situation the real legal ones are determined by
actual and existing law which no one has yet been proven to have broken. The
claims that Coughlan 'stole' anything are ridiculous. The claims that
McLaren participated in it and benefited from it are unproven.

I don't know much about law except where I need to in my line of work
and apparently relating only to my country, but thanks for the
information.


In short it seems the positions people are taking on this matter are mainly
to do with their pro or anti Ferrari bias rather than the facts or their
actual knowledge. However, it's Usenet so I expect little else.

Here's where it gets confusing -- I am and always have been a McLaren/
Williams fan -- I just don't like how Coughlan kept, copied and
scanned the documents.

....And I still want to see my competitors algorithms for artifact/
motion rejection in compressible fluids ;-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: McLaren suspect named
    ... How, exactly, did Coughlan "access" Ferrari data? ... The laws that apply here are copyright law and, if applicable, patent law. ... So Coughlan simply having in his possession documents originating at Ferrari ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)
  • Re: the price of privatization
    ... House "overwhelmingly" passed a law that makes them immune from prosecution. ... The democrats who voted "overwhelmingly" in favor of protecting Blackwater ... we're going to preach the rule of law in Iraq, ... contractors in Iraq. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Mercenary Air
    ... Whoever engages in conduct outside the United States ... What happens to private contractors who kill Iraqis? ... That leaves international and U.S. law. ... the government of Iraq announced its decision to join the court; ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: When stoopid morphs to scary.
    ... more than four years late -- that private security contractors in Iraq ... "My question is in regards to private military contractors. ... Code of Military Justice does not apply to these contractors in Iraq. ... I asked your Secretary of Defense a couple months ago what law governs ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Re: Ferrari in court
    ... FIA stuffs McLaren for supposedly illegally having Ferrari ... IP but uses docs illegally obtained by Ferrari to stuff McLaren. ... It is not their business to decide on whether or not the law was ... radio communications was a breach of law in several EU countries, ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)