UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for File-Sharing

July 15, 2010 -

A trade group representing the music industry in the United Kingdom wants internet service providers in the region to pay a fee to combat piracy. The group, PRS for Music, represents around 65,000 songwriters and publishers and is also comprised of another group - the Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society.

The group proposes that ISPs either combat unlicensed media files on their networks or pay a fee to blanket license copyrighted material and offer it to its users. In other words, copyright enforcement becomes the job of ISPs. The organization also suggests an alternative where ISPs could be charged for "blanket licenses" so that they can "determine for themselves how best to capture the raw value of media on networks."

"Operators would face a fee for the transmission of unlicensed media on their networks though that fee would be reduced in line with reductions in the volume of unlicensed media transmitted," according to the proposal from PRS for Music.

Meanwhile, the Internet Services Providers' Association UK, a trade group that represents about 200 companies, said that it strongly opposes the ideas put forth by PRS For Music. Instead the group would prefer a "market-based approach, reforming "the licensing framework so that legal content can be distributed online to consumers in a way that they are demanding."

"We reject the idea that ISPs should have to pay a fee for levels of copyright infringement that may occur on their networks," the group told PC world in an e-mail statement.

Copyright infringement in the U.K. has been getting a lot of attention lately; politicians in the country recently passed the Digital Economy Act, which assigns new responsibilities to communications regulator Ofcom. Ofcom is obligated to create a "code of practice for ISPs aimed at reducing online copyright infringement." Ofcom has already drafted and published a plan and is open to public comments through July 30. The draft includes guidelines for ISPs to limit or cut off Internet access for users accused of illegally sharing files without copyright holder permission.

But PRS For Music faces another hurdle in its plan, which it notes in its proposal: "safe harbor" legislation in the U.S. and Europe:

"In the United States and Europe, the ISP is not necessarily liable for the infringement of rights by their customers because of the safe harbors granted through e-commerce legislation," it said.

PRS for Music noted in its paper that it would be necessary to revisit these safe harbor rules so that rights holders could license ISPs content for file sharing on their networks.

 

Source: PC World


Comments

Re: UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for ...

HAahahaahahahahhaa....file share is the cost of business these days since the internet and all makes it impracticable to try and stop people from shareing. Its easier to go after sites that make money of the trade of files than the people who download.....


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for ...

By the same logic, should car manufacturers pay damages when one of their customers manages to run someone over?

Re: UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for ...

Should, then, the recording industry pay a set amount each year to the courts, for the legal cases their artists might get involved in etc? Should they pay money to hotels, to cover the cost of damage that their artists might cause? Better still, and a closer analogy, should they pay for the acts of their customers?

Re: UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for ...

I don't see ISP companies paying up for the piracy there customers could do.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: UK Trade Group Proposal Suggest ISPs Pay for ...

These shenanigans aren't anything new.  Remember the blank tape tax the RIAA proposed in the mid-1980's?

Probably not; Tipper Gore was so busy trying to regulate content that it slipped under the radar.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightGot that same recommendation on Twitter. So I guess that is a good sign.09/15/2014 - 8:39pm
prh99Portlandia, though I don't watch a lot of sitcoms. Heard it was good though.09/15/2014 - 8:02pm
E. Zachary KnightSitcom recommendations for someone who like Parks and Rec but hates The Office: Go.09/15/2014 - 6:08pm
NeenekoEven if they do change their policy, they can only do it moving forward and I could see the mod/pack community simply branching.09/15/2014 - 12:50pm
Michael ChandraAs for take the money and run, the guy must have a networth of 8~9 digits already.09/15/2014 - 10:33am
Michael ChandraMe, I'm more betting on some form of mod API where servers must run donations/payments through them and they take a cut.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraEspecially since they want it for promoting their phones. Killing user interest is the dumbest move to make.09/15/2014 - 10:32am
Michael ChandraGiven how the EULA actively allows for LPs, I'm not sure Microsoft is ready for the backlash of disallowing that.09/15/2014 - 10:31am
Matthew Wilsonthey wont do that, the backlash would be too big.09/15/2014 - 10:25am
ConsterSleaker: how is that a flipside? Sounds to me like that's basically what Notch himself said, except rudely.09/15/2014 - 10:18am
MaskedPixelanteOn the plus side, no more lazy Minecraft LPs, since iirc Microsoft has a strict "no monetization period" policy when it comes to their stuff.09/15/2014 - 10:13am
james_fudgeBut it continues to sell on every platform it is on, so there's that09/15/2014 - 10:09am
james_fudgeOh, well that's another matter :)09/15/2014 - 10:08am
E. Zachary KnightNothing against Notch here. I think it is great that he made something so cool. I just can't understand how it is worth $2.5 bil09/15/2014 - 9:59am
InfophileWhat a world we live in: Becoming a billionaire was the easy way out for Notch.09/15/2014 - 9:42am
james_fudgelots of hate for Notch here. I don't get it. Sorry he made a game everyone loved. What a monster he is!09/15/2014 - 9:37am
SleakerOn the flipside, Notch has been a horrible CEO for Mojang, and the company has grown on sheer inertia, DESPITE being mishandled over and over.09/15/2014 - 9:33am
SleakerI can understand Notch's statements he made to Kotaku about growing bigger than he intended, and getting hate for EULA changes he didn't enact.09/15/2014 - 9:32am
MaskedPixelantehttp://pastebin.com/n1qTeikM Notch's statement about the MS acquisition. He wanted out for a long time and this was the easiest way.09/15/2014 - 9:08am
ConsterEh, I can't blame him.09/15/2014 - 9:01am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician