Member

I echo what the noble Lord, Lord Arbuthnot, said: every computer scientist would offer that computer evidence and systems are inherently unreliable. We are all used to updates and bug fixes. Warranty provisions in software contracts almost universally state that no warranty is provided whereby the operation of the software will be uninterrupted or error free, or even that software errors will be corrected. In computer science, a bug is not an uncommon event; it is an anticipated event. Leaving it to an individual with no access to underlying code data system architecture to prove that a complex digital system has failed is literally nonsense—it is asking the victim, without access to the information, to prove that the person with the access has done something wrong. It is not only the definition of unjust; it is simply inequality of arms. It is a structural imbalance in the courts.