NEWS
Secretary of state for business, innovation and skills Peter Mandelson has reiterated the government's 'three strikes and you're out' plan to cut off illegal file-sharers' internet access.
Speaking at a cabinet creative industries conference yesterday, the business minister said proposals made back in August will feature in the Digital Economy Bill expected before Parliament in November.
(Photo credit: mutednarayan via Flickr.com under the following Creative Commons licence)
For more on this story, see Mandelson puts 'three strikes' internet plan in motion on ZDNet UK.
Comments
There are 7 comments. Join the discussion
1. drew stephenson
And once again, no details (because they have no idea) on how they would determine whether the content was illegal or not. Additionally no detail on why they expect the ISPs to foot half the bill. It's the entertainment industry's problem, let them foot the whole bill.
The flaws in this proposal are so numerous and so large that sensible criticism is almost impossible. Maybe that's the objective?
2. karen challinor
oh wonderful bigger sticks and still no carrot
the internet arms race will now escalate one more notch, encryption & tor here we come so I guess they are the next things to be outlawed
quote - ["We will put in place a fair, thorough process, involving clear warnings to people suspected of unlawful file-sharing, with technical measures such as account suspension only used as a very last resort," Mandelson said.]
so this still going to be a guilty by suspicion crime, noone actually has to provide proof that will stand up in a court and no one actually has to prove you are an illegal file sharer, bye bye habeus corpus
quote - [However, Mandelson said in a statement that an appeals process would be put in place to guard against this. "Only persistent rule breakers would be affected — and there would be an independent, clear and easy appeals process to ensure that the correct infringer is penalised," he said]
anyone want to bet that the appeals process is on line and you won't be able to get to it once you are cut off ?
and of course we have to trust them not to make mistakes
quote - [A source at a British ISP, who wished to remain anonymous, said the measures could be extremely costly for ISPs and, ultimately for their customers, depending on how the government proposals were implemented.]
so it's yet more poorly thought out knee jerk legislation from our lords and masters that will hit us squarely in the pocket
and I do wish you'd print the story in Silicon.com rather than giving a link to ZDNet
3. Richard Davies
Its just a shame that these people (government ministers) don't have a clue on the subject matter and therefore can't make an informed decision.
Really they should have left it to the music industry to sort out as its a mess they created.
The only reason they don't want to sort it out themselves is cost and image.
I also can't find information on what will give you a 'strike' (exactly) and how much this type of monitoring will be done and will cost etc.
4. Gradivus
The current copyright laws are perfectly adequate.
The music "industry" has become rich by sponging off artistes, but now sees its profit stream drying up.
Seek realistic damages under the existing copyright system? No, too difficult. Get the Government, the ISPs, etc to bale you out? Yes, that'll do nicely. thank you.
5. David Stoughton
It's fascinating that media companies can compound their problem by persuading governments to buy into a basic misunderstanding about how the Internet affects business.
Fascinating, and also sad to see these businesses find ways to guarantee maximum pain for the many brilliant people who work for them. Instead of helping them find the new paradigm that will support their creativity and ensure an income, they are locking employees into an exhausted business model. This more or less ensures that, for most of their full time staff it will be too late to change by the time they wake up. Mass redundancy in the future replacing gradual migration into a new model - the pain of change now deferred in favour of the pain of unemployment in the future.
It was a sure thing that government would not understand events that have been moving so quickly. It's deplorable that they have allowed themselves to be sold a pup by big business instead of taking the trouble to learn and think it through. Or, come to think of it, perhaps they did. Is this a poison pill tactic from a government that perceives its days to be numbered?
6. karen challinor
The government does not understand the internet
if it did then they would probably pass legislation to make it's use illegal for all but business purposes
they see it as a means to tell the electorate what to do, to disseminate such information as they see fit to give us and as a means whereby commerce can take place in a virtual high street
they do not see it as a means of empowerment for the people, they do not see it as a means of information exchange where large groups of people can access any information not just that which is approved, they do not see that social networking sites can mobilise large groups of people extremely quickly and that the electorate can now respond to issues faster than government and that if these trends continue then traditional government will become redundant and is already well along this road
we may think the music industry is kicking up a fuss because the Internet has made it's business model obsolete, wait until government realises the same thing is happening to itself and it is rapidly losing it's authority
7. h0mepwner
Yet another pointless waste by this lame government
Thanks to their appallingly poor understanding of how the Internet works further swathes of taxpayers money will now be wasted paying overpaid lawyers. They just don't get it any more than they "got" the outrage over MPs expenses. Also as highlighted over the weekend, when they don't like what expert advisers tell them, they get rid of the experts and replace them with yes men. The whole thing is as doomed as abour at the next general election.