In the news
As you have no doubt seen by now, ministers are announcing today an update of their thinking on the issue of peer to peer filesharing.
In essence this is a strengthening of the same procedures for letter-writing and warning of those who seem to be illicitly sharing files, but with the tougher ultimate penalty of suspension of service and retaining the ability for ministers to decide when ‘technical measures’ (ie enforcement through the broadband service of the offender) can be introduced. The overall objective of providing a legitimate framework for dissemination of content in a way consumers want and at the right price remains firmly in place.
This has been one of the most difficult issues to navigate, and we’re not at the end of the process yet (the consultation is still open and has been extended). We’ll undoubtedly see more debate as we put the Bill through Parliament. In the mean time, we’re happy to hear reactions…
I tend not to use expletives in polite conversation, but several came to mind when I heard about this. Why does the government even bother writing an extensive report, and then conducting expensive consultation process, if it is going to ignore its own advice?
The consultation is ongoing! What is this about? Trying to bury bad news in August?
I was one of the original contributors to the consultation (p2p – 012 – FOI.PDF) and I see that the single point I made was substantially ignored.
To date there has been zero evidence that any intervention is needed, because there has yet to be any PROOF that any damage is being done to the industry. Every industry claim has no data to back up the claims, every independent study says there’s either very little loss, or a net gain for the industries.
I was told that if contributors were found to be telling lies in their statements, their contributions would be ignored, they’ve not made many accurate and truthful statements, yet are getting what they want, to the detriment of the population. That is not good policy.
Ben Jones
Torrentfreak.com
When I read the DB report I was satisfied that the government was taking a balanced sensible approach and fulfilling their responsibilities to as many parties as best they could.
This backtracking is disgusting and I’ve thoroughly lost all faith that DB know what they’re doing. I previously put off supporting The Pirate Party as I felt it was unnecessary, however as of now I am a fully registered member.
I made several points about file sharing in the interim report and on many other posts since. The digital britain team seem intent on ignoring them. So what is the point of endless consultations? I reckon the media industry can look after itself. Government can update the copyright laws. And digital britain team can get on with the main issue which is delivering next generation access to the people of this land. And that means fibre. Not obsolete victorian copper.
The pirate issue is being used as a smokescreen to cover up the fact that other countries are moving into the information superhighway and we in the UK are stuck in the slow lane. A gigabit or bust. Like Korea.
Mandelson on holiday must be a nightmare.
The entire EU Telecoms Package (amendment 138) was defeated by Parliament on this issue.
Sarkozy and the Carla Bruni clauses (3 strikes) have been thrown out by the French Parliament and then the French Supreme court.
The DB report approach looked sensible as the so called technical measures are being rehearsed now in the enforcement of ‘fair use’ policies, from which the best practice technical measures will arise and become transparent.
Sharing connections using wifi will be a feature of any Digital Inclusion and Universal Service, hence the threat to cease connections based on existing ‘proof’ is not practical.
He is also threatening the mere conduit status of ISPs. Timms should know better.
It is certainly unhelpful that the Government’s Explanatory Statement on P2P Filesharing is not accessible:
http://www.berr.gov.uk/administration/page13625.html
Why should the reaction to the kinds of technical measures proposed be different in the UK than it has been in Sweden and France?
A key problem here is that the media and telecommunications industries have the kind of well-resourced, organised, articulate, and connected-in-high-places “voice” that Government is accustomed to hearing. I do not begrudge them that voice; but I expect Government to be less naive than so quickly to drop the Carter report’s measured approach that “Ofcom would undergo a detailed process in order to ascertain that technical measures were required”.
If the Internet was a fixed and static entity, then technical measures proposed might prevent (some) piracy. But fixed it is not: heavy-weight pirates will find ways round such measures, whereas “citizen pirates” (the ones who would be caught by the technical measures) are surely a notional rather than a real source of revenue for rights-holders. Furthermore the measures threaten net neutrality with ISPs “elevated” from being neutral carriers to having to police individual subscribers’ activity.
What we need just now is a visionary approach that takes full account of the current sea-change in how citizens access, create, and share digital content, and which acknowledges that the creative businesses of the future will be different from those that we have now, with different approaches to “Rights”. Protecting “old media”, as these proposals seem to do, will protect old business models, rather than encouraging new ones to emerge.
“What I did on my Holiday” by Peter Mandelson.
The following sentence just about sums up the attitude that is prevalent amongst our democratically chosen representatives.
“It would be important to ensure as far as possible that innocent people who may be affected by such technical measures would retain access to the Internet services they need, including online public services.”
Does that mean a whole re-think on our country’s attitude to the process of law, will we only ensure that people who are innocent of commiting a crime are protected from miscarriages of justice as far as possible.
Luckily that is always the way that Mandelson has seen the law being applied to himself, one of a small minority that has the resources to get himself found not guilty of any little transgressions.
If the law is to be taken as more of a guide than a set of rules am I at risk of being given a speeding ticket to fulfil government targets or am I just being argumentative and unreasonable when I assume that by not breaking the speed limit it will be impossible to get a ticket?
Apparently not, according to the argument they are using to justify a dictatorial attitude to pursuing filesharers. I mean come on, taxing all internet connections to pay for filesharing would at least be a more honest way of saying that the media industry wants more money from us and they are calling in all the favours they have bought from our politicians to get it.
I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that the law is only applied to those without a voice on the political stage, as we have seen when the Honorable Members were caught with their fingers in the till, “just pay it back old chap, we can’t sack you after all.”
I was very impressed with the Digital Britain report originally, especially with the 50p broadband tax that would be used to improve the networks(which could have made us the fastest in Europe).
Sadly it seems the government has dropped that (so likely the networks will fall behind other nations), and now is forcing the ISPs to spend a fortune on pursuing file-sharers (rather than upgrading the networks).
I just don’t see the point in it at all, it would be much better to spend the money on upgrading the networks so that the speed hit due to piracy is lessened and we become a leading nation in connection speeds. It seems like the government is just doing whatever the media companies wish them to do without any thought for the people.
This looks like yet another attempt to introduce monitoring of people’s private internet use. The mistakes of the past are that the internet is alive and vibrant and that it can’t (and should not) be controlled by paranoid governments.
Technology may have the edge but is it necessary for us all to waste so much time and effort supporting an anachronistic copyright policy that is in need of substantial reform. At the very least we should be severely limiting the profits of third parties rather than the original intent of rewarding the creator.
This is a disgusting action.
I am a supporter of this government but enough is enough – I will now vote for the pirate party.
[...] as one commenter indicates in a comment on the Digital Britain site, more people will be joining the UK Pirate Party, although the party [...]
Can’t fathom the logic of criminalising thousands (millions?) of teenagers and taking away the access of that entire family.
Why not have an enviable service delivering high speeds and including those currently marginalised (be it by geography or age/finances).
These changes seem to be at the request of creative industry and we can be sure any costs incurred by the ISP will be passed on to customers.
Many businesses use the internet to sell products/services, and they will be affected by people losing access. It’s also worth noting that the cheapest gas/electricity tariffs are only available on the internet (so increased chances of fuel poverty for those affected).
So, slower speeds, increased costs, no help for marginalised groups, negative effect on non-creative businesses, continuing barriers to social mobility, and criminalising children.
This is what we’ve come to expect from government but is made all the worse when the first report, broadly, got it right.
That said I’m sure Mandy had a lovely holiday!
[...] as one commenter indicates in a comment on the Digital Britain site, more people will be joining the UK Pirate Party, although the party [...]
[...] piece on this story… and they mention me! Meanwhile, as one commenter indicates in a comment on the Digital Britain site, more people will be joining the UK Pirate [...]
What more did we expect? It was inevitable that this would happen, that our government would turn around and smack us netziens in the face at the behest of “big business”
Its not the piracy thats the problem but the lack of foresight by these companies and the people that govern us to see a “third way”
If more time had been spent on developing ways to generate revenue streams through these alternative sources and less time taking people to court over a few mp3 files we wouldn’t be in this mess.
I don’t steal anything, I replicate it through a series of zeroes and ones. How can that be called theft?
For every action there is a reaction and this may well end up the “cause celebre” for the pirates of the UK to take a stand for net netrality.
@Ben Jones, you were ignored because you made valid points siding with filesharing, I’ve followed your comments over the past few months and your comments I feel speak for us, the downtrodden net society, Keep up the good work fella
Disgusting. I’ve lost faith in government for years now (not from UK by the way). And the entertainment inustry disgust me as a whole. I still buy stuff I like though, I’m still honest to my ideals that if I like something I should support it by buying, even if it takes me some years to afford it.
When we have a Pirate Party Here I will be a member for sure. Maybe even mess with politics to try to change this disgusting scenario – even if I hate politics.
Well… To sum up my thoughts, I’ve now registered with the UK Pirate Party, and would strongly urge anyone who has not yet joined, to join…
Based on this status update:
http://twitter.com/digitalbritain/status/3380345921
” @MusicTank This story is wildly inaccurate! http://tinyurl.com/rdb727 ”
You didn’t even know this was coming, did you?
Talk about disconnected government. You are all a waste of money because Peter got a blowjob from a music exec.
I am sick and tired of the UK Government telling me how I can and cannot use my possessions and services. If I break the law by downloading music, come and charge me yourself. Don’t pester my poor ISP into disconnecting me, it’s not their fault. If I stay within my bandwidth cap and pay my monthly bill then I don’t expect to have anything more to do with my ISP. They are a gateway onto an open and intricate network and that is all they ever should be.
If I use a DVD copier at home to make illegal copies of all my DVD’s for my friends should the government demand the power company to cut my supply so that I can’t use the copier? No. Why? Because they are just a utility provider providing electricity to my property, what I do with it when it gets here is my business. Stopping me is the job of the Police, not the Utility company. The same goes for ISP’s. They are providing a utility to me, if I misuse it then the police should be the one’s knocking on my door.
If we give ISP’s the power to monitor, influence and disconnect users then we have truly opened a can of worms that could end up putting us years behind the rest of the world in technology. How long would it be before Sky throttled my connection when streaming TV to keep me on their service? (BTW Sky don’t throttle yet and I commend them for it).
I plead with DB, see sense before you force us all into the hands of the Pirate Party.
[...] as one commenter indicates in a comment on the Digital Britain site, more people will be joining the UK Pirate Party, although the party [...]
[...] as one commenter indicates in a comment on the Digital Britain site, more people will be joining the UK Pirate Party, although the party [...]
This is technically infeasible. Current methods of discovering filesharing are inaccurate to wholly inaccurately and cannot be relied upon. Dynamic IP address that the majority of internet subscribers have mean that they can be falsely accused of downloading what the previous owner of the IP address downloaded. Open wifi and poorly protected WEP wifi (that most people use) enable people to fileshare illegally without any worries, but puts there owner of the connection at risk. People can spoof their IP address to seem like other people, including politicians like Mandy.
You cannot take 7 million people to the courts; if you do not take them to court it is “guilty upon accusation” instead of “innocent until proven guilty” and thus illegal.
Filtering out information at ISP level is infeasible – packets of data have only 400 nanoseconds to be processed and any filtering would take several milliseconds (millions of times longer).
This disconnection scheme is against EU law; it is therefore illegal. It is also unfair – why should a whole family have to suffer for one persons wrongdoing. What happens if the parents work from home some days – they lose their job. No one can meet friends on facebook, access on line bank accounts or get online government information. The internet is _essential_.
I can’t vote labour after this. I just can’t. Technological ignorance ruins all of politics.
I support the disconnection measure and would even ask for more stringent prosecution of all illegal file sharing. Illegal ANYTHING is reprehemsible and punishment worthy. I am saddened that so many of you would object to the measure.
I have always had my doubts about this entire issue.
as someone who is active in the entire “downloading” scene, (legal, open-source downloads only), for a long time, there needs to be a medium reached.
There is “nothing” short of destroying the internet that will prevent the population from downloading what they want, if they want to.
New encryption services are popping up all the time and sadly it seems the ones who will get caught are those who are relatively small players in the “game.”
this government has lost my support, entirely.
a shame really…
i also have my doubts over the legality of the statement released. to act as proposed directly, would be in direct contradiction of EU legislation and could result in the UK recieving a fine, and who would pay this….US!
(this is my understanding anyway)
BLISS PROMOTIONS
I agree with the previous comment, – nothing short of destroying the internet will stop pirates. Time to get real Sam, tell Mandy to go back to his holiday pad and leave it to the digitalbritain team to sort out… it’s nowt to do with him anyway. He knows Jack.
Thanks!