[p01926]

"I am leaving it as I found it. Take over. It's yours." Ellis Wyatt

If you feel you're being compelled to act immorally, remember non-compliance — whatever the immediate consequences to yourself — is the only acceptable course of action. When we decide to spend our days building powerful tools, we enter into an implicit agreement not to let them fall into the wrong hands. If the government comes knocking, BURN IT DOWN. Make good on your debt to humanity.

[m0nty]

> remember non-compliance — whatever the immediate consequences to yourself — is the only acceptable course of action

Seriously, can we get away from these fine-sounding (but otherwise utterly useless) slogans and clarion calls? There has to be a better response than a scorched-earth policy.

I'm a software developer based in the UK currently working on an app which will probably be affected by this bill. Apart from destroying the product and/or risking jail-time, are there any sensible options? Can I incorporate somewhere else in the EU and run everything from overseas? What if I am not a UK company but a DE company and everything happens from there?

I realise it's early days, but I'd hope HN could come up with some informed suggestions.

[maze-le]

I think the only viable option would be to leave the UK. Not just you physically, all bank accounts and insurances too. When you have set up the company somewhere else (maybe netherlands, germany or sweden) you would have to renegotiate all contracts with all your clients, have new laywers, new accountants, etc...

I can not think of any way other than leaving, that will not compromise either your product, your customers or your integrity.

This is 'scrorched earth' if you will, without 'fine-sounding, useless slogans'. Consider this: If this crap becomes law, you certainly won't be alone when leaving. And when a critical amount of developers and entrepeneurs leave the UK permanently, the economy will suffer... greatly I think. And that, sad as it may sound, might be the only argument politicians would consider, when it comes to signing this bill.

[joering2]

> And that, sad as it may sound, might be the only argument politicians would consider, when it comes to signing this bill.

Sorry to be this guy, but you do realize you're talking about UK, right??

IF you have pay attention to anything that comes out of UK politicians and being actually implemented in the law, you would have a hard time believing that UK citizens' disobedience, not matter how loud, will change ANYTHING AT ALL!

Sadly, they're doomed and I cannot find a friend who left years ago and never looked back.

[Symbiote]

> Sadly, they're doomed and I cannot find a friend who left years ago and never looked back.  Is your double negative the right way round there? That means your British emigrant friends are looking to [move back to?] the UK.

I'm British, and recently left. I've met about 6-7 British people in my new country (I haven't been seeking them) and none have any intention of returning. Of course, they visit family and so on, but at present there's no reason not to.

[flashm]

Where did you go, out of interest?

I'm in the UK and weighing up options.

[Symbiote]

Denmark.

I wasn't particularly looking to move here, though it was a country I'd thought about. Then someone forwarded a job advert to me, and I ended up with an offer I couldn't refuse :-)

Anywhere in the EU is easy to move to, and easy to move away from if you don't like it. The big differences are probably the ease of getting a job, speaking the language (or not needing to) and meeting local people.

[Sophira]

I feel Scotland would do well to start hinting that tech startups may want to start there, given the likelihood of a successful referendum to leave the UK when it happens.

[Spakman]

As someone who lives in Scotland, that would be utterly fantastic.

[logfromblammo]

I'd suggest that everyone come join the party in the U.S., but then I realize that we have equally stupid politicians trying to run everything, too.

I get the sense that reincorporating in Bermuda, Gibraltar, or one of the Channel islands might help in some way, but I can't quite figure out just where in my brain that idea came from. Maybe it was one of those foil hat ideas that I had to discard because it only worked for Commonwealth citizens.

It would take a careful reading of the law to discover the most appropriate loophole. In the U.S., that often takes the form of having no meaningful penalty or enforcement for breaking a law. So, basically, companies just ignore it. But UK law works differently, so I can't say for certain whether that means a judge could invent an appropriate penalty or not.

[madaxe_again]

No. My response will be one of two things:

1) Shut the company down, lay off 50 employees, leave 100 clients without revenue, damage the UK economy to the tune of £300M/yr.

2) Go public, go to jail, and (1) will then happen anyway.

So frankly throwing the towel in looks like the only sane course of action, unless you have a magic wand to affect government policy.

[antihero]

I wonder if you can set up the company as an international entity or something like this, and have yourself as employee?

[tankenmate]

Or better still, set up a foreign company, the sole shareholder of which is a trust of which you are a non executive beneficiary. Then make yourself a contractor to said company with an explicit contractual requirement that you must affirm that you have not been compelled (legally or otherwise) to author anything (code or otherwise) that may materially effect said company.

The govt will still probably try to find a way around it but at least you've made it very difficult for them.

[dogma1138]

The govt wouldn't give a squat about what contractual agreements you have made they can still compel you. By your logic I can make the same deal with an explicit contractual requirement that I cannot be detained by the police and then go on a murder spree and say sorry I got a contract that says you can't arrest me...

[CommanderData]

It would make a difference. Circumventing this law will be possible even if it means setting up company in a different country.

>The govt wouldn't give a squat about what contractual agreements

Setting yourself up in that manner would mean more challenges and making it difficult for the UK govt to win in court.

[nixgeek]

If you physically move to Germany, perhaps, but it appears you would need to discontinue all operations in this country. Nobody employed here, no bank accounts, etc.

Another person posted a somewhat insightful excerpt from the draft which covers this situation:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11265963

[pbhjpbhj]

Supposed you work for a company in DE and UK gov try to compel you, just have someone outside the country revert changes.

Also, isn't the government bound by the Computer Misuse Act (and it's European and other foreign equivalents). That would make the coercion an illegal act.

Dare say there would be amendments intra UK but we'd need pan-European changes to be able to lawfully compel someone to access a [foreign] computer without authority

[PJDK]

Well since this is only a proposed law, writing to your MP would be a good start.

[m0nty]

I agree, but it's likely to change nothing. I'm not being defeatist per se, but I went through all this with the RIP Act in 2000 and it was futile, even though the Conservatives went through some posturing in defence of civil liberties. But now they are introducing worse legislation and Labour can hardly say "this is unprecedented" or whatever, since they were so gung-ho about it fifteen years ago. I wrote many letters and got no decent responses, just boiler-plate reiterations of why it was "necessary."

[PJDK]

Well from the theme of this thread an open letter in the Times signed by a large proportion of the CTOs of Silicon Roundabout saying "we'll go to jail or leave the country if this goes into effect" will probably at least get some face time with a minister over this.

[madaxe_again]

I met my mp over it, he told me to "talk to the hand". He's a tory boy, never worked, doesn't care.

I also met a friendly Lord over it last year who already opposed it loudly, and ensuingly had his political career murdered for his trouble.

[m0nty]

Funny you mention the Lords ... I wrote a position paper for the Conservative front-bench spokesman for Trade and Industry about the RIP Act 2000. Worked better than letter-writing and meeting my MP. All this because I happened to play cricket with him occasionally.

[erkkie]

The threat of a scorched earth policy needs to be strong enough for governments to either not consider these types of actions or suffer the consequences. I can understand it not being practical for the people involved though, and I sympathize.

[akhatri_aus]

Make a Societas Europaea instead of Limited company (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/european-companie...).

Only thing is its a bit more expensive than a typical Ltd.

[SCHiM]

Can't you get a digital citizenship in Estonia and perhaps transfer you company to there?

Frankly it seems like a very good solution if the problem is laws in the UK. This program was launched specifically to attract entrepreneurs and offer them the means to launch tech businesses from anywhere in the world in Estonia.

[ocschwar]

You need to leave the UK. No amount of corporate charter red tape or offshore server hosting will let you get away with developing a secure product if Theresa May doesn't want you to.

[vox_mollis]

but I'd hope HN could come up with some informed suggestions.

That is an informed suggestion, informed by the reality that participation in the political process does not work, at all.

[benevol]

> Can I incorporate somewhere else in the EU

In case you want "Europe, but without EU law and surveillance", there is Switzerland.

[pjc50]

The thing is, the actual probability of being asked to comply with this for a small company is fairly small: it's aimed at Facebook and Apple. And perhaps privacy-orientated services like Lavabit. Your best option is to retain a really good ECHR lawyer, because that's where the fight is going to be.

[maze-le]

> being asked to comply with this for a small company is fairly small

This may be true for now, but I have seen far too many laws beeing used in other contexts than what they were intended for.

For now it maybe used in cases of 'terrorism'. In three years your products will get compromised because the state wants to catch a drug dealer. In 8 years, they also want to catch regular burglars, and in 10 years these laws may be used against you, because you forgot to mention a $100 bill on your tax declaration...

[mhurron]

Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh harder.

There is money to be made. When it comes down to making money by putting in backdoors or shutting it down and making none, the backdoor will be put in every time.

[marcus_holmes]

At least in the short term.

When London fails to become the "Fintech capital of the world" like it wants to be, because any fintech moving there has to main its own security and every potential customer knows it.

When UK companies are continually hacked and ripped off because the bad guys KNOW there's backdoors in every one of them, all they have to do is find them.

When the UK economy has taken enough of a beating. Then they might change their minds. Maybe.

[naveen99]

Wanted: ninja, rockstar backdoor programmer ! Benefits: train your backdoor coding replacement overseas and get 6 month severance !

[nixgeek]

"the only acceptable course of action".

In your opinion, perhaps, but my gut is that most people would comply rather than spend several years in an 8x10 cell.

https://twitter.com/nixgeek/status/708267763089989632

I'd be interested to see how the numbers turn out on that!

[gutnor]

I think quite a few people would not mind being a martyr.

The problem is that the most likely reality is that you will go to jail, your business will be shut down, you will never find another job again, your whole family will be added on all the government shit lists and nobody except your friends will know what happened.

There is a star system to martyrdom too. For 1 Snowden, there are probably thousands jailed and forgotten.

[dogma1138]

Martyrs more often than not seek out situations to sacrifice them self under rather than people who make the "right" call when pressed.

No right minded person in the world would rather go to jail than comply with this, the few that would really have an existential dilemma about this issue would most likely opt out to preemptively avoiding it than be the ones who sit at their desk with a gun in their hand and a bulletproof vest.

[ci5er]

That's right: what's the point of becoming a symbol that no one knows about? It's not like you are given a soap box or a time-slot from your 8x10.

[imaginenore]

Or you could just move your project to a different country and give the control to some anonymous corporation that can't be traced to you.

[HashThis]

The government actions are immoral. When an entrepreneur has raised capital from investors, his personal reputation is on the line to be a good shepherd for their investment. Shutting down their company destroys the entrepreneur's personal investment and betrays their ability to keep their investors investment safe. This all comes back to the immorality of the government's actions in this area.

[CM30]

This times a million. It is better to pay the price for doing the right thing than to turn against your morals because of your comfort. And if enough people and companies do the same, things will change.

Evil prevails because good men do nothing. And this generation seem to be the masters at doing nothing.

A truly gutsy CEO would say screw you to an oppressive law or government. They'd be willing to die in prison for their beliefs, and shut the whole company down in the process. Take the story to media and watch the government's stupidity get them publically humiliated by the press and social media.

Things like this will only stop if they become political suicide for any party or politician that tries to implement them.