Home
 » ISP News » 
Sponsored

MPs Call on UK Government to Implement ISP Piracy Warning Letters ASAP

Friday, September 27th, 2013 (8:43 am) - Score 1,296

A new report from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee has taken a broadly pro-enforcement line on tackling Internet copyright infringement (piracy) and called for the much-delayed 2010 Digital Economy Act (DEAct) system of Warning Letters from broadband ISPs to be implemented at “far greater speed” than planned.

The report, which was setup to examine how the government could better support the “creative economy“, is staunchly pro-enforcement in its outlook and uses almost every opportunity to bash the notably more balanced Hargreaves Review (2011). Indeed the majority of those who gave feedback appeared to be copyright groups (here).

At present the controversial DEAct, which among other things outlines a system by which ISPs would issue Notification Letters to customers whom are suspected of involvement with “illegal” sharing of copyright material (repeat offenders could face court action or possibly even “temporary” disconnection), does not expect to send its first letters until “the latter half of 2015“ and further delays cannot be ruled out (here).

The report admits that the DEAct “was originally rushed through Parliament with relatively little debate in the House of Commons” and has been delayed by various other issues, such as BT and TalkTalk’s legal challenge, concerns over the legality of its cost sharing order, political disagreements and generally strong opposition from a variety of other sectors (i.e. everybody from public libraries to journalists).

Never the less it ignores recent evidence (example), which shows that the proposed solution would most likely end up being a waste of time and money, and instead calls upon the government to “resolve the current impasse” on implementing Ofcoms Online Copyright Infringement Code and to “to set out a clear timetable“.

Extract from the Report

We recommend that a copyright infringement notification system envisaged by the Digital Economy Act be implemented with far greater speed than the Government currently plans. By targeting information letters to the worst infringers, early implementation will, we believe, serve an important educative purpose which could percolate more widely.”

The report also claims to be “encouraged” by the “progress” that has been made towards developing a temporary voluntary system of warning letters, although recent feedback from BT, TalkTalk, Sky Broadband and Virgin Media suggests that ISPs still have serious reservations about this approach (here).

The MPs also called for “businesses to use the current law to bring claims wherever it is feasible for them to do so” (hopefully not in the speculative invoicing style of ACS:Law that proved so ineffective) and took a swipe at the Open Rights Group (ORG) for daring to oppose some of the DEAct’s stricter measures by saying they, “firmly repudiate their laissez-faire attitudes towards copyright infringement“.

Sadly Internet Service Providers, at least in terms of Written Evidence, only had BT to represent them and we hope this hasn’t done a disservice because most providers have historically expressed concern over the DEAct’s approach. At least on this issue BT appear to be more in-tune with consumers and the wider market.

BTs Statement:

In relation to the Digital Economy Act (DEA), whilst some will feel frustration about the time taken to implement, it should be recognised there is an inevitability of delay when introducing controversial laws; France, Spain and New Zealand have all experienced this with similar legislation.

However, developments from and alongside the Judicial Review have helped to clarify a number of the issues that troubled a number of stakeholders during the passage of the legislation. These issues were not satisfactorily addressed at the time because of the lack of pre-legislative scrutiny by Parliament and the Bill being rushed through under the pre-election “wash-up” process.

BT’s view, therefore, is that there has been no material adverse impact from the current failure to implement the Digital Economy Act in line with the timetable envisaged at the time the DEA was passed.”

BT also reflected concerns about the plan for a £20 appeals fee, which is intended to “deter too many appeals and so make the system “attractive” to copyright owners“, and warned that ISPs could not begin technical implementation of the DEAct’s letter warning system because “they do not have basic information on the level of infringements, a pre-requisite for system design and build“.

In a practical sense the report offers little in the way of constructive feedback and seems more intended as a vehicle to criticise all those who preach a more moderate approach to tackling copyright infringement.

Leave a Comment
6 Responses
  1. Avatar Daniel Lyons says:

    The very same Digital Economy Act that according to a whistle-blower was not based on any evidence, just the assertions of vested interest groups?

    http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php/digital-britain/718-we-had-no-evidence-for-deact-uk-govt-confesses

    We can’t have laws that are essentially written by vested interests as this creates injustice. For one example look at the appeals system for action taken under this awful law. How is it in the interests of justice to charge those merely accused with infringement? Why should someone have to pay £20 for being falsely accused? and there most definitely will be false accusations made. The whole system stinks and the DEA should be repealed.

    1. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      Welcome to politics. Very rarely do politicians listen to actual independent research. As you say they’re more likely to respond to what newspapers decide is the big issue of the moment or lobbyists who come baring gifts.

  2. Avatar dragoneast says:

    Parliamentary lobbying is big business. And such efforts will deliver results. When MPs speak, in whatever capacity, you have to try and look behind the curtain to see what’s really going on; rather than just blindly accept their, or even making up your own, story.

    In this case I hope the market will deal with the problem, by providing reasonably priced and quality downloads which I think is starting to happen. Better than ham-fisted regulation. But politicians can’t stop themselves, and can’t stop helping themselves too.

  3. Avatar Chris says:

    I bet there isnt a £20 warning letter fee to deter the copyright holders from sending excessive amounts of what will likely be speculative letters.

  4. Avatar darren says:

    I think this act should be totally scraped it is a disgrace it was based on no proper evidence it focuses on the entertainment companies france backed away from three strikes the uk music industry is doing well in terms of sale they should blame the people who runs these website you don’t target your own customers it all boils down to greed i hope it doesn’t get implemented it invades people privacy

Comments are closed.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.

NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.

NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Vodafone £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £22.00
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Onestream £22.49 (*29.99)
    Avg. Speed 45Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • xln telecom £22.74 (*47.94)
    Avg. Speed 66Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Plusnet £22.99 (*36.52)
    Avg. Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £55 Reward Card
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (2829)
  2. BT (2799)
  3. FTTC (1796)
  4. Building Digital UK (1761)
  5. Politics (1690)
  6. Openreach (1647)
  7. Business (1460)
  8. FTTH (1342)
  9. Mobile Broadband (1258)
  10. Statistics (1257)
  11. 4G (1083)
  12. Fibre Optic (1072)
  13. Wireless Internet (1038)
  14. Ofcom Regulation (1030)
  15. Virgin Media (1022)
  16. EE (716)
  17. Vodafone (684)
  18. Sky Broadband (678)
  19. TalkTalk (676)
  20. 5G (540)
Promotion
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact