View Full Version : Digital Economy Bill
redeyedtreefrog
22-Mar-10, 20:41
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/speakout/extremeinternetl
Please help :~(
Done :)
Great letter. Added a couple of paragraphs myself.
Don't know how helpful it will be - might be a bit late?
I encourage anyone else who believes in freedom to sign this. They say it is just for copyright etc but who knows where that will lead next? Not to mention the likelyhood of falsely identifying innocent people as criminals and the fact we shouldn't all be monitored.
Did anyone see the Panorama program about it last week? Isn't it strange how it is all the generic pop drivel bands and the big record companies that are for the bill but the genuine artists etc are totally against it?
I think I remember seeing a letter to the editor in Fridays paper about this also, urging John Thurso MP to reply. Even ignoring piracy this sets a dangerous precedent and gives the government too much power over the Internet, incidentally there is talk about making Internet access a human right, with this bill you're cut off without trial or a chance to defend the results from incompetent tracking companies copyright holders hire, I've had a few cease and desist letters for downloading Linux distributions from Bit torrent.
EDIT: It might be a better idea just to use that website for the letter then copy it and send it directly, shows more effort and might illicit a better response. Also I doubt this will stop serious piracy either, I can think of several ways around it with any serious consideration.
Job done - the last thing we need is another poorly thought out piece of legislation without a proper debate.
The Drunken Duck
23-Mar-10, 10:01
Signed. Anything that Peter "Prince of Darkness" Mandelson thinks up is bound to be shady. The guy is a crook of the highest order.
Hmmmmm .. http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article6797844.ece
Does any one have a link to just what is proposed?
Does any one have a link to just what is proposed?
IMO the on-line community, if I can call it that, is too used to getting stuff for free. At the expense of global big business (its their taxes that pay for pretty much everything so it is in our interests to make sure they are as profitable as possible). This bill or something like it is long overdue. The people who play fair have nothing to worry about.
Edit: and as for being monitored, you think you are not already?
Does any one have a link to just what is proposed?
As for information on the bill try:
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/
http://www.itpro.co.uk/621385/latest-digital-economy-amendment-sticks-to-lobbyist-proposal (http://http://www.itpro.co.uk/621385/latest-digital-economy-amendment-sticks-to-lobbyist-proposal)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/mar/04/lords-digital-economy-bill
Essentially your Internet connection can be suspended (not disconnected you'll still be charged for it) after just three accusations from tracking companies/copyright groups to the ISP with no evidence, trial or appeals process. Like I've said the companies and tracking technology are very dodgy and if your a business or education institution the one user bad user or three false positives can get you suspended.
Theres nothing democratic about this bill, it reads like it was written by the companies and lobbyists - they're trying to push it through without debate.
Google, Yahoo, BT and Talk-Talk are all opposed to this bill to name a few.
It would also violate EU law as Phorm did.
As for Mandelson I'm surprised hes still in goverment.
A bit more info to save people searching:
Its vague in many areas, intentionally so you could say
It sets a minimum fine of £50,000 for copyright infringement if exercised
It allows the government to rewrite the law in this field with secondary legislation which doesn't need to be approved
It reads like a piece of US legislation
The Bill makes the assumption that there is a one-to-one relation with piracy and sale. So it assumes that the same stuff will be bought that is now downloaded, which is a massive logical fallacy.
It assumes a 70% reduction in the first year or companies want more legislation
Edit: Some more specific links, including a video explanation
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/why-care
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/ourwork/reports/brief-on-digital-economy-bill
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Bill
http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Bill_Info_and_FAQ
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/against-deb (http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/against-deb%20%28Video%29) (Video)
I HATE,being required to go to any or various unknown web sites in order to participate in a post!
I went on this one -An am still as dim as the proverbial toch h.
must be me!
As for Mandelson I'm surprised hes still in goverment.
If he had to rely on being elected he wouldn't be.
Like this bill he is something else which is undemocratic, Labour put him into the House of Lords then brought him back into the cabinet so the people wouldn't have any say in the matter.
Mr P Cannop
23-Mar-10, 14:57
has any one read the bill yet ??
I HATE,being required to go to any or various unknown web sites in order to participate in a post!
I went on this one -An am still as dim as the proverbial toch h.
must be me!
Yeah apologies, some of it can be quite technical in places.
If he had to rely on being elected he wouldn't be.
Like this bill he is something else which is undemocratic, Labour put him into the House of Lords then brought him back into the cabinet so the people wouldn't have any say in the matter.
Yeah I'm not a fan, I think he was essentially fired two or three times before.
has any one read the bill yet ??
The actual text of the bill and amendments is available at http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2009-10/digitaleconomy/documents.html I find it rather sad it was posted on the BPI site three hours before the government announced it.
Mr P Cannop
23-Mar-10, 15:31
has any one read it and what is everyones views about the bill ??
If he had to rely on being elected he wouldn't be.
Like this bill he is something else which is undemocratic, Labour put him into the House of Lords then brought him back into the cabinet so the people wouldn't have any say in the matter.
Crikey Fred I agree 100% :eek:
Well John Thurso replied to my e-mail (quoted below), I disagree with the first few paragraphs and hes kind of ignored some of my points but to be honest even if all measures were implemented it would only stop casual file sharers and downloaders anyone with average or so technical knowledge could still do it with relative immunity.
He seems to have more knowledge on the subject than most MPs still it does read like a party briefing written by a researcher plus government could still try and pass it with a 'Rump parliament'
Just wondering what everyones thoughts were, and if anyone else got a reply. I'm guessing its a form letter.
Dear [Me],
Thank you very much for your recent email about the Digital Economy Bill.
This is a very wide ranging Bill and covers issues such as a new remit for Channel 4, the classification of computer games, plans for switchover to digital radio and the future of regional news on ITV as well as the issue of illegal downloading.
My Party supports the creative industries and believes that many aspects of this Bill are vitally important to the continuing success of our radio, television and content industries. We are also concerned about the financial implications of illegal downloading of copyright material and recognise the importance of protecting intellectual property.
A report published on the 17th of March 2010 predicted that a quarter of a million jobs in the UK's creative industries could be lost by 2015 if current trends in online piracy continue. Commenting on it Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the TUC, said: "The results of the study stress that the growth of unauthorised file-sharing, downloading and streaming of copyrighted works and recorded performances is a major threat to the creative industries in terms of loss of employment and revenues. The scale of the problem is truly frightening now - let alone in the future if no firmm actions are against illegal file-sharing are taken."
For those reasons we do believe that some action is needed and must form part of the Digital Economy Bill. However, we have opposed - and helped defeat - goverment proposals (contained in Clause 17) of the original Digital Economy Bill) to give itself almost unfettered powers to act against copyright infringement. Further, as a result of debates instigated and amendments passed by the Liberal Democrats in the Lords, the government's original proposals relating to illegal peer-to-peer file-sharing have been significantly improved.
As a result, no action to introduce "technical measures" (whether temporary account suspension, bandwidth throttling or whatever) can be introduced until:
1. Soft measures (letter writing) have been used;
2. An evaluation of their effectiveness has been undertaken;
3. An evaluation of the need for, and likely effectiveness of, technical measures have been undertaken;
4. Further consultation has taken place;
5. Proposed legislation is brought before parliament for decision, and
6. There is an explicit assumption of innocence until proven guilty.
We remain concerned by some aspects of the system for tackling peer-to-peer file-sharing being introduced in the Bill and will taken further action in the Commons to scrutinise and improve legislation. In particular, we are concerned that there will not be enough time for in-depth consultation on the initial code that Ofcom will draw up, We also feel that there is currently inadequate protection in the Bill for schools, libraries, universities and other businesses offering internet access to the public.
We are also unconvinced of the merits of the various technical measures that have been proposed, including bandwidth shaping and temporary account suspension. For this reason we have amended the Bill to ensure that any such measures cannot be introduced without proper consultation and not until evidence has been produced to prove that this is the best available options. We are further seeking to ensure that any measures brought before parliament will be subjected to the maximum scrutiny in both Houses and that it will be possible for changes to be made to them before a final decision is made.
We are urging the creative music, film and video games industries to work more vigorously to develop new business models which will make it easier and more affordable for people to legally access their products. We hope that this combined with "soft measures" and an effective education campaign will mean that further action will not be required.
The Party agreed at our Spring Conference to establish a working party to address these issues. With at least a year before there will be any attempt to introduce "technical measures" this will provide an opportunity for the party to consider the outcome of research into the effectiveness of the early stages of the implementation of the legislation in the Digital Economy Bill.
The Billl has now completed all stages in the Lords but cannot proceed unless it has as a minimum been debated in a "Second Reading" in the Commons. We believe that many of the measures in the BIll that do not related to illegal file sharing and important and must be allowed to go into law. However, in respect of those that relate to illegal file sharing we will not support them in the Commons if we are not satisfied that the procedures in place are fair and allow for full consultation and scrutiny before their introductions in the future.
With very kind regards,
John Thurso
Bobinovich
26-Mar-10, 10:42
Yes mine was fairly similar,. At least the general consensus that more consultation does need to take place before it's made law indicates a step in the right direction, even if other parts are somewhat washed over.
I'm still not convinced it won't get passed, If I were a cynical man I'd make the points that:
ACTA (copyright) discussions are taking place in secret between governments and the businesses involved (with the ICO complaining to the government about it).
This Digital Economy Bill benefits those companies' business models over the rights of individuals.
Political parties are short of money to fight an election
A general election announcement will likely dominate any other event (such as the forced passing of a bill) to its exclusion from the news.
This bill might be forced through and then, co-incidentally, a general election announcement will be made. It would have to be forced because of the time-limit for elections. In which case the Digital Economy Bill would be passed by a rump parliament; that is one composed of MPs resigning or retiring while the others are away campaigning and gearing up for the election.
Hmm well seems people were, the bill is being forced through by a rump parliament, maybe they want free holidays like Mandelson.
------------------
EDIT:
For anyone interested in the positions. The Conservative and Lib Dem final positions were a disappointment; the group of backbench Labour MPs expressing serious concerns were the best, alongside John Redwood, whose analysis of why ramming things through without debate is likely to cause problems was superb. Which was surprising as I was almost convinced by John Thurso and the party line.
------------------
Some quotes from last nights debate:
Austin Mitchell said:
What would a delay of another three months or so in order to discuss the Bill properly and give it full consideration do? There would be no danger in taking such an approach. A delay of three months would not produce the collapse of the creative industries, which has been held up as the threat hanging over us. This needs to be settled and discussed by the Commons through its full procedures; this should not be a rushed Bill, carried on the basis of the half attention of a discredited, dying and distracted Parliament.
John Redwood said:
"It is a disgrace that the House is not treated with courtesy by the Government. It is quite wrong that a Bill of such importance and magnitude was not tabled earlier. It is quite wrong that there is an attempt to rush through all parts of the Bill without proper scrutiny and debate."
John Grogan observed:
"I looked at all the Bills that received a Second Reading after a Prime Minister had gone to the palace-I went back as far as 1987 ... I managed to find the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Bill in 1987, the Architects Bill in 1997, the Lieutenancies Bill in 1997 and the International Organisations Bill in 2005. What they all shared in common was that there was no dispute between hon. Members in respect of them. It really is shameful that we are proceeding in this way."
Tom Watson said:
"It is a very great pity that the Bill cannot be tested in Committee in the light of some of those questions. As a twice ex-Whip, I am rather embarrassed by the fact that the Bill is being railroaded through in the wash-up. Frankly, there has been a squalid deal between the three Front Benches, and they should be ashamed of themselves. The people who care about this Bill-and there are many out there-will see that for what it is."
redeyedtreefrog
07-Apr-10, 21:46
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_parliament/
They're doing a third reading now, Guardian's live blogging it at http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/apr/07/digital-economy-bill-internet
Well the third reading of the bill has passed, with little or no debate.
The lords still has to confirm it, but yeah, this is bullshit. A bunch of back bench labour MPs made the biggest noise. The talking-heads and pundits were already doing the rounds on TV and radio talking complete rubbish about how most of the 20,000 letters were from America, and how there isn't actually a lot of opposition. Yet every man and his dog is up and arms over the 'death tax' et al. I hear they're going to rename it the 'were-coming-to-take-your-children-tax' (!)
The media is equally to blame though both in coverage and in the pundits and talking headers they let on. If all three choices are complete dicks then what is the virtue of a democratic system.
Humerous Vegetable
08-Apr-10, 12:09
It appears that hardly any of them could be bothered to turn up, including John Thurso. http://www.didmympshowupornot.com/lookup?postcode=KW14+7XE This would be the same MP who didn't turn up for any of the votes on MP's expenses. It makes you wonder how he manages to rack up such large travelling expenses, when he never seems to go anywhere.
Yeah I noticed that, its a shame I was really warming to Lib dems as it happens but now I'm right off them again.
I don't mind if the bill passes AFTER rigorous debate, reports, and expert statements.
Its just the lack of debate and general (I imagine bought) consensus between the front-benches of all parties that annoys me. Also scheduling it for a rump parliament.
Metalattakk
08-Apr-10, 12:16
It appears that hardly any of them could be bothered to turn up, including John Thurso. http://www.didmympshowupornot.com/lookup?postcode=KW14+7XE This would be the same MP who didn't turn up for any of the votes on MP's expenses. It makes you wonder how he manages to rack up such large travelling expenses, when he never seems to go anywhere.
Hansard (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/32.htm) says he voted against.
Actually yeah, he did vote against according to this also... guess I shouldn't be so cynical.
http://debillitated.heroku.com/
redeyedtreefrog
08-Apr-10, 20:29
Am I right in thinking that the bit saying that they can block access to sites that host infringing material got passed? Doesnt that mean that in theory Youtube could be blocked, facebook could be blocked, even Wikileaks could be blocked? Google? Taking it to extremes, this forum could be blocked because I posted this:
http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/Windows-Vista-Ultimate-Activation-Crack-Available-for-Download-2.png
which is owned by Microsoft.
Someone should go to Mandelson's house and set up a bittorrent proxy on his network, see if he gets cut off.
Am I right in thinking that the bit saying that they can block access to sites that host infringing material got passed? Doesnt that mean that in theory Youtube could be blocked, facebook could be blocked, even Wikileaks could be blocked? Google? Taking it to extremes, this forum could be blocked because I posted this:
http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/Windows-Vista-Ultimate-Activation-Crack-Available-for-Download-2.png
which is owned by Microsoft.
Someone should go to Mandelson's house and set up a bittorrent proxy on his network, see if he gets cut off.
What a whinging thread this is :(
redeyedtreefrog
08-Apr-10, 21:28
What a whinging thread this is :(
Blame the MPs for mucking it up.
What a whinging thread this is :(
My apologies if our complaints in favour of freedom and in opposition to an under the table shafting annoy anyone... I for one welcome our corporate overlords, (!) I mean the general public is largely ignorant of the whole thing anyway. I'm sure if you wait, another mindless, badly written TV show to distract you with meaningless choices will come along soon.
My apologies if our complaints in favour of freedom and in opposition to an under the table shafting annoy anyone... I for one welcome our corporate overlords, (!) I mean the general public is largely ignorant of the whole thing anyway. I'm sure if you wait, another mindless, badly written TV show to distract you with meaningless choices will come along soon.
Can't wait :lol:
redeyedtreefrog
09-Apr-10, 21:56
TalkTalk have said that they won't be cooperating with the measures outlined: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/08/internet-piracy-bill
Loopholes
http://aaisp.net.uk/dea.html#loopholes (http://aaisp.net.uk/dea.html#loopholes)
http://aaisp.net.uk/dea-code.html (http://aaisp.net.uk/dea-code.html)
http://aaisp.net.uk/legal-cp.html
Basically reclassify yourself as a communication provider, some people seem to think you need to run open wi-fi for this but thats not the case. Unless you live on your own and let no one else use your connection you can be classed as a communication provider.
My ISP, AAISP (http://aaisp.net.uk/) let you reclassify easily online and at no extra charge.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.