Posted: 03rd Feb, 2011 By: MarkJ
The
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), a body that represents the interests of
750,000 library and information services in over 150 countries around the world, has officially raised its objections to the controversial
Digital Economy Act (DEA) with the UK government.
The act seeks to combat "
illegal" (i.e. unlawful) internet copyright file sharing on public
P2P networks through a series of measures, which broadband ISPs will be required to enforce. The measures, such as warning letters, account suspension (disconnection), bandwidth restrictions, website blocking and passing customer details onto rights holders for legal action, could all end up being used.
Unfortunately the lawyers working for
Rights Holders can only identify the owner of a connection (e.g. a library) and not individual users, especially on a shared local network. The result is that many businesses, education establishments, family homes and public/open Wi-Fi hotspots could be
at risk of disconnection, or possibly even court action, due to the unlawful activity of a single unidentifiable user.
The
Slightly Right of Centre blog, which focuses on
Digital Rights, reports that the IFLA's Senior Policy Advisor,
Stuart Hamilton, has written to the parliamentary committee that is currently studying the
Sharing of Costs Order and outlined the groups objections.
The IFLA's Senior Policy Advisor, Stuart Hamilton, wrote:
"As an ISP, a library can be made responsible for the monitoring of their networks for copyright infringement and incur significant financial obligations as a result. As a subscriber, libraries are likely to receive notifications from their ISP to the effect that a copyright owner has made a report against them for alleged copyright infringement. The financial and time costs of complying with or appealing against this type of situation cannot be underestimated, nor can the types of penalty that could be imposed on libraries as result of an infringement by an individual user, such as the imposition of technical measures (such as reductions in quality of internet service, which ultimately affect library users).
...
The imposition of new restrictions on library networks runs counter to the library’s vital mission of providing freedom of access to information to its users. Not only does the legislation potentially lead to or encourage the adoption of blocking technologies that are valuable for learning and information sharing in an educational context, it also raises fundamental freedom of expression and privacy issues as public bodies inevitably monitor the activities of their users.
The chilling effect of the monitoring of Internet use should not be underestimated, and the electronic recording of library users’ information seeking activities is not consistent with a democratic approach to access to knowledge. Library users should be free to seek information without barriers, and without fear of surveillance."
The IFLA is a very significant organisation and as a result its objections to the act are more likely to be taken seriously. However the government has already looked at similar concerns from UK Libraries and effectively ignored them (
here).