Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

March 16, 2010 -

The British House of Lords has pushed through the latest version of the Digital Economy Bill, which features provisions that would put the onus on ISPs to track and report illegal file sharers and copyright violators.

The Bill, which now moves to the House of Commons for approval, would have ISPs issue such reports to both the copyright owner, as well as to the British Office of Communications (OFCOM), reports a story on Beta News. If passed, OFCOM would control how ISPs monitor their users and how long information is retained by ISPs.

In order to “prevent or reduce” Internet copyright infringement, the Secretary of State may direct OFCOM to limit, suspend or cut off ISP user access for “some or all relevant subscribers.” New measures would also reportedly enable courts to force ISPs to block websites that contribute to copyright infringement.

Junior Business Minister Lord Young said such measures would “not be capable of being enforced” and were incompatible with the European Union Technical Standards Directive.

The changes, which are alleged to have been copied almost word-for-word from a music industry lobby group draft, caused Pirate Party spokesperson Andrew Robinson to state, “The public will not respect a law that was quite literally written by the record industry, for the record industry.”

Open Rights group Executive Director Jim Killock added:

The Bill doesn’t require any test of evidence before harsh punishments are imposed on people accused of copyright infringement, and opens the door to a ratcheting up of unwarranted powers without democratic scrutiny.


Thanks Andrew


Comments

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

Ah, the Mandleson Bill. It can suck my left nut. The computer savvy downloaders that this is aimed at will simply stick 2 fingers up at it, mask their ISPs or use other people's networks. The record companies are scrambling to try and halt internet piracy, when they only have themselves to blame for pursuing an outdated business model that aims to overcharge people for inferior content.

I pirate DVD movies. Why? Because I can download a video file, which I can then transfer to my iPod easily. Because of these outdated copyright laws, companies are forbidden from making and distributing legal software that would allow me to transfer LEGALLY PURCHASED DVDs from my collection to my portable devices. If I had such software, I would buy more movies. As it is, I simply pirate them, as I can then watch them how I want to watch them.

Copyright laws ENCOURAGE piracy. Not the other way around.

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

Agreed, the whole thing puts the entire control of Copyright law, not only now, but in the future, in the hands of a man who has been frequently seen being wined and dined by the Music Industry, and who has no voter opinion to be responsible for whatsoever. If there are laws to be arranged over the people of this country, at the very least, they should be made by those who have actually been voted into the job by the public.

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

...Joe Biden?

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

Indeed. Sure such things CAN be used for illegal purposes, and no EULA will change that. The industries need to FINALLY learn that just because someone can doesn't mean they will.

Hell, I COULD have illegally pirated Half life 2 as I have Daemon tools and an internet connection, but I didn't, I bought it legally because I wanted to support Valve.

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

Ok, how are they going to enforce it then?

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

The Digital Economy Bill also known as the Mandelson - Geffen Bill.

Re: Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill

Dislike.

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Papa MidnightIn case anyone is interested, there is a clause written into Section 10 of Windows 10's EULA that provides for a Class Action Waiver, and restricts the user to Binding Arbitration.07/29/2015 - 11:15am
TechnogeekNo, that folder is what gets used for the upgrade process. I already had the upgrade go through on my notebook.07/29/2015 - 10:35am
Andrew EisenMatt - And AGAIN, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published? How is it not accountable to its readership (which, AGAIN, is primarily game industry folk, not gamers)?07/29/2015 - 10:10am
james_fudgeThat's the clean install, for anyone asking07/29/2015 - 9:23am
TechnogeekAlso, it's the upgrade that's available for installation now. You might need to forcibly initiate the Windows Update process before it'll start downloading, though. (If there's a C:\$Windows.~BT folder on your computer, then you're in luck.)07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekAdmittedly there's more room to push for an advertiser boycott when you get into opinion content versus pure news, but keep in mind that reviews are opinion content as well.07/29/2015 - 8:46am
TechnogeekMatts: There's a difference between "this person regularly says extremely terrible stuff" and "I don't like the phrasing used in this one specific editorial".07/29/2015 - 8:45am
MattsworknameWait, is that for the upgrade or the clean install only? cause I was gonna do the upgrade07/29/2015 - 8:32am
james_fudgehttps://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows1007/29/2015 - 8:30am
PHX Corp@Wilson, I'm still waiting for My upgrade notice aswell07/29/2015 - 7:57am
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician