Posted: 05th Apr, 2011 By: MarkJ

New Media Law (NML), a UK based law firm, has leapt on the
Digital Economy Act's (DEA) recent problems by proposing their own solution to "
illegal"
internet copyright infringement (piracy) - a
£1 per month music tax. This would be applied to almost all of the country's broadband ISP connections, with the revenue being distributed amongst the copyright holders, based on a statistical assessment of what music is being streamed or downloaded via the internet.
In reality it's not a new proposal.
European Media Law (EML) came up with something similar in 2009 (
here) and the
Performing Rights Society for Music (PRS) did exactly the same in 2010 (
here). In fact, over the past 3 years, more than a few Rights Holders have suggested it.
However, New Media Law swears blind that its proposal "
is not a tax" because people would be able to "
opt out" if they "
don’t wish to receive streams or downloads of music via their internet connection".
The suggestion appears to be that legitimate music and video streaming services (e.g. YouTube, Spotify) would be
blocked unless you pay the charge. This does not appear to be in keeping with the spirit of government
Net Neutrality policy, which last year (
here) warned ISPs to ensure that consumers still had access to all "
legal content [and] service[s]".
The Governments Net Neutrality Principals
Openness – consumers should be able to access any legal content or service. Content providers should be able to innovate and reach users.
Transparency – providers should set out in detail the extent of their traffic management and the impact on customers.
Support for innovation and investment – ISPs should be able to manage their networks to ensure a good service and have flexibility in business models. Competition is important for ensuring continued openness and choice.
However, NML claims to have an answer to this problem by offering an exemption for certain services that are perceived to have already paid for legitimate licences.
NML Partner, Ian Penman, explained:
"In the same way that the PRS and PPL collect money from radio stations and television broadcasters for the use of music, and then distribute that money to the copyright holders (by a system that is often referred to as “blanket licensing”), New Media Law believes that a similar system can be applied to internet downloads. But, and this is important, it would not be a “blanket licence”.
Rather, it would be akin to the TV licence, which gives you the right to watch your television - but you still have to pay for football or movies on Sky. Why? Because there are many companies that operate perfectly legally on the internet, by offering music for download and/or streaming, after obtaining the necessary licenses from the copyright holders. Obvious examples include iTunes, Amazon, Spotify and (eventually) Qtrax. They already pay (some would say overpay) for legitimate licences, so they should not be made to “pay again”. They wont be.
New Media Law’s proposal is for a “music charge” to be applied to every internet connection. It would give the right to receive music on that connection - and people that don’t want to, can “opt out”. It could be a sum as little as £1 per connection per month (more for larger commercial broadband users). The charge can be collected by the PRS or PPL (or some new collective body with the relevant technical expertise), and then distributed amongst the copyright owners, based on a statistical assessment of what music is being streamed or downloaded via the internet.
Sadly, the “music charge” will need to be imposed by central government – as (in our humble opinion) there is NO chance of the ISPs adopting it without a gun to their heads. Many in the music industry can confirm this after years of trying to get the ISPs to accept that literally billions of illegal downloads have been enabled by ISP connections – to no avail."
It's not clear how NML's "
statistical assessment of what music is being streamed or downloaded via the internet" would work. The previous PRS proposal called for the often controversial use of
Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technology to monitor what broadband customers downloaded.
The proposal could be complicated to manage, especially given the global nature of internet content, and might end up requiring costly customer monitoring solutions. Not to mention that ISP content restrictions are also very easy to circumvent. Many consumers might also find it unfair that they should be made to pay extra to cover for the abuses of others.
New Media Law estimates that the new charge would
raise at least £50m per month in the UK alone, plus of course a further £10 per month in VAT to help keep the governments eyes and ears closed to opposition. This suggests that around 50 Million people would be charged, which can only mean that mobile operators would also be forced to pay (the UK is home to about 20m fixed line broadband connections).
It's understood that New Media Law will be meeting with
Lord Clement-Jones - the Liberal Democrat peer that is currently promoting the “
Live Music” bill - at the House of Lords on
April 26th, to present its concept of a “
music charge” to the UK Government.