B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Section 2(1)(c) of the Theft Act 1968 disapproves of this post.
I put it to you sir...............
Section 2(1)(c) of the Theft Act 1968 disapproves of this post.
No court is EVER going to give someone less punishment if they have stolen something that was made easy to steal. It just isnt relevant. People can call the club knobs or lax (And some posters on here are soooo keen to show that - I reakly dont know why), but stealing is stealing. It's the bottom line, LFC stole the information and used it. Theft. wtf with some of these posters on here.But you could have prevented it! That's the point, you still suffer.
It's known as victim blaming. It's City's fault because they 'had it coming'.No court is EVER going to give someone less punishment if they have stolen something that was made easy to steal. It just isnt relevant. People can call the club knobs or lax (And some posters on here are soooo keen to show that - I reakly dont know why), but stealing is stealing. It's the bottom line, LFC stole the information and used it. Theft. wtf with some of these posters on here.
Anyone who uses that turn of phrase is shite beyond words, mate.I put it to you sir...............
Nobody is saying that. Just because we're discussing how City allowed the data breach doesn't reduce the level of the crime of data theft that was committed. Data breaches are subject to regulatory investigations and fines in some industries, especially so after GDPR, so while the culprit may be subject to 100% guilt for their crime, the victim organisation can also be punished and guilty of not taking proper steps to prevent it. Two different crimes, if you like, caused by one offence.No court is EVER going to give someone less punishment if they have stolen something that was made easy to steal. It just isnt relevant. People can call the club knobs or lax (And some posters on here are soooo keen to show that - I reakly dont know why), but stealing is stealing. It's the bottom line, LFC stole the information and used it. Theft. wtf with some of these posters on here.
Why is everyone skipping the point here. If you went on holiday and left a window ajar and returned to find your house had been burgled. I'm sure you'd be pissed off if your insurance company and the police turned round and said "well you should of shut your window sir, we ain't investigating or paying out"But you could have prevented it! That's the point, you still suffer.
Ah forget it. Not worth the hassle trying to explain tbh. Think it's discussions that have gone away from the matter via basic examples that don't fit quite right.Why is everyone skipping the point here. If you went on holiday and left a window ajar and returned to find your house had been burgled. I'm sure you'd be pissed off if your insurance company and the police turned round and said "well you should of shut your window sir, we ain't investigating or paying out"
Anyone who uses that turn of phrase is shite beyond words, mate.
They are looking for an IT support engineer at the moment, love to get a call to go and help Pep with his laptop problemS
Send your CV to mcfc.co.uk