Digital Economy Bill.

[Mark Wild]

Interesting stuff :) Did your MP vote? http://www.votethemout.co.uk/


YouTube- Mark Thomas talks about the Digital economy Bill

[Dynamic Entertainment]

Thats ok, my MP voted for :D

Whilst some areas i dont agree with, on the whole i think the bill is a step in the right directoin for anti-piracy and will make it that little bit harder for cowboy outfits to get their music.

What i really want to know is how they intend to diferentiate from the p2p file sharing downloads and the likes of Amazon Downloader etc as each will use the same bandwith and it it goes on that alone, there could be a few legally downloading people who get told that there not....

[Corabar Entertainment]

Anybody care to give a summary to save me watching a video almost 10 minutes long? :D

[Mark Wild]

Anybody care to give a summary to save me watching a video almost 10 minutes long? :D

It would take me 12 minutes to type a summary :p


http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/why-care

[mikeee]

Anybody care to give a summary to save me watching a video almost 10 minutes long? :D

Industry cheers as Digital Economy Bill becomes Act
17:27 | Thursday April 8, 2010

By Robert Ashton

A “key milestone” for the music industry and the way in which people use the internet was reached this afternoon when the House of Lords voted the Digital Economy Bill – and its measures to tackle online piracy - into law.

BPI chief executive Geoff Taylor was one of the first to welcome the new Act. Taylor believes the Digital Economy Act will be a key milestone in the development of the internet and will help secure Britain’s world-beating status as a creative force in music and entertainment.

Taylor adds, “The Act’s measures to reduce illegal downloading will spur investment in new music and innovation in legal business models. An internet that rewards taking creative risks will mean more British bands enjoying global success, more choice in how to access music online and more jobs in our fast-growing creative sector.”

Taylor warns the Act will not totally eliminate piracy on its own. But he adds (the measures) “will go a long way towards reducing illegal freeloading and will help to build a more sustainable ecosystem for content on the internet”.

Hand-in-hand with the new measures, Taylor says the industry will continue to expand the range of legal services on offer and produce more industry campaigns, such as the recently launched Music Matters initiative, to raise awareness of the new services.

UK Music chief executive Feargal Sharkey says that one of the key purposes of the legislation is to reconnect consumers with the true value of creativity and to build and develop a world class digital market.


Sharkey says, “UK Music welcomes the creation of the Digital Economy Act. Firm foundations are now in place on which to develop the UK’s digital economy.

“The UK’s music industry has no urge to look backwards and, as we have consistently stressed, legislation is not a means to an end. It is a spur to action.”

IFPI chairman John Kennedy also says the passing of the Act recognises that if a country is to have world-class creative industries then it also needs laws that will effectively protect their rights.

Kennedy says, “The new UK legislation is a decisive step towards dealing with P2P and other forms of illegal distribution in a way that can substantially reduce the problem. Most importantly, it recognises that Internet Service Providers have an essential role to play in curbing online piracy and reducing infringements on their networks.

“The move by the UK creates momentum for the graduated response approach to tackling piracy internationally. Governments increasingly understand that, in the digital economy, creative industries like music, film, books and games can drive growth and jobs for many years to come if they are provided with the right legal environment and with a modern system of enforcement in which ISPs actively cooperate.”

Taylor, Sharkey and others now recognise there is more work to be done over the next week and months in developing a Code of Practice with ISPs and Ofcom, which will give guidelines on areas such as the content of letters sent to infringers.

Readers' comments
Mike Pailthorpe 8 April, 2010
The quality of this legislation is acutely summed up by the revelation (unsurprising to those who watched his performance in Parliament over the last two days) that Government legislation champion and "expert" thinks that an IP address is to do with "Intellectual Property". See his letter to fellow MP Emily Thornbury at http://i.imgur.com/1pXlO.jpg
none of your business 8 April, 2010
goodbye music 'industry' and good riddance
The British Public 9 April, 2010
The way this ill conceived legislation was rushed through parliament by representatives with no understanding of the issues is an affront to democracy. The full implications of this stupidity will become apparent in the not too distant future. Welcome to the new government controlled and censored internet.
Shmulik 9 April, 2010
Anyone who knows anything about the internet and workings can guess that overnight new cloaking software will come out and people will continue as usual and hate the creative industries even more, This Bill is a burial for the music industry the way we know it not a saver.
Billy Kofi 9 April, 2010
You can already get free masking software making you anonymous to your ISP or anyone else when downloading illegal content This bill is floored in so many ways, i'm willing to bet that a year or two from now there will be little or no difference in the millions of illigal files being downloaded globally
Jamie Dowling 9 April, 2010
Up here in space I'm looking down on you My latest trace Everything you do You think you've private lives Think nothing of the kind There is no true escape I'm watching all the time This "law" is poorly worded and serves only the interests of the middle men at the BPI, not the artists themselves. The BPI and UK Music's lobbying of government (admittedly one that is ignorant of technical issues) with inaccurate statistics and flawed argument is offensive to democracy. I will no longer buy any product which provides income to the BPI. http://blog.planetjamie.co.uk/blog/?p=1299 http://blog.planetjamie.co.uk/blog/?p=1302
Andy C 9 April, 2010
You can't blame the BPI for being pleased. After all, they drafted large sections of the DE bill.
Hugh Hancock 9 April, 2010
As a fellow creative I recognise that there's a very strong temptation to regard this sort of lawmaking as the saviour of creative industries that are currently struggling to adapt to new technologies and culture. But, sadly, I think it will turn out that enacting hasty legislation designed to attack our fans (and, like it or not, we don't have enough dedicated followers these days that we can pick and choose) will end up damaging the creative industries most of all. I really hope you're right and this legislation ends up helping us all. But I don't think that attempting to legislate technology out of existence will work well for us. To give a historical example, if we'd succeeded in having the video recorder banned or limited, I doubt it would have worked out well in the long run.
Matt Flaherty 9 April, 2010
I'm really disappointed by the attitudes of Feargal Sharkey and others. It seems to me that these industry leaders are as ignorant of the effects of this act of parliament as the parliamentarians themselves. You will not see an increase in sales. If anything you will see a decrease. The act does not foster creativity or protect investment in intellectual property. Instead it protects an ailing and frankly obsolete distribution infrastructure that is either too lazy or too stupid to figure out news ways of competing with digital distribution.
adrian zagoritis 9 April, 2010
'The British Public' - nice name, tells a story really. Thank goodness for this legislation. It's the bare minimum that's required right now. Opponents are the ones who can't grasp the simple fact that the record industry isn't just about greedy record companies and filthy rich stars ripping off the public - it's about millions of roadies, engineers, producers, struggling writers and artists who are striving to give the public what they want - ie decent music. Great songs don't write themselves and find their way onto our shelves on their own you know - it's human beings that try to make it happen. Nd then millions just steal it. Support us to earn a decent and honest living instead of pilfering our product and everyone wins - we earn a crust and the music improves! It's a no-brainer. 79p per track? Doesn't sound like much of a rip-off to me.
Dave Cridland 9 April, 2010
Yes, this Act will change the face of music piracy in this country, albeit by driving it underground in innovative ways, and it'll have knock-on effects in the availability of network services. For example, I'm expecting to see Tor, P2P botnets, and WiFi hacking on the rise - so it's unlikely to have any real effect on piracy, although it'll become increasingly hard to track, and largely impossible to prevent or police. I'm sadly anticipating the demise of open access points offered by libraries and small businesses. The likes of Fon, too, will vanish in the UK as people realise that the Act essentially precludes them. Gradually, as P2P botnets rise - and they will - people will discover that the Act mandates perfect anti-virus software. As anti-virus software hence becomes a legal requirement, AV vendors will slowly increase pricing for UK residents, of course, but that's not the only additional cost the UK Digital Economy will bear, of course, as the ISP's increased costs for policing copyright infringement are certain to be passed on to subscribers. In turn, that'll increase the cost differential between large ISPs and smaller ones, effectively killing off smaller (and often award-winning) players in that industry - just another step in making the UK a backwater of the Internet. Innovative web services, incidentally, will also become increasingly hesitant to set up shop in the UK. Any web-based shared storage will effectively run the risk of being branded "likely to be used" for piracy, and effectively shut down. Much of this should have come out in the Commons debate - it'd all been pointed out to MPs, after all - but only a tiny handful bothered to show up for the debate, leaving many of these issues unheard. This is a tragedy of democratic failure.
Adrian Zagoritis 9 April, 2010
'The British Public' - nice name, tells a story really. Thank goodness for this legislation. It's the bare minimum that's required right now. Opponents are the ones who can't grasp the simple fact that the record industry isn't just about greedy record companies and filthy rich stars ripping off the public - it's about millions of roadies, engineers, producers, struggling writers and artists who are striving to give the public what they want - ie decent music. Great songs don't write themselves and find their way onto our shelves on their own you know - it's human beings that try to make it happen. And then millions just steal it. Support us to earn a decent and honest living instead of pilfering our product and everyone wins - we earn a crust and the music improves! It's a no-brainer. 79p per track? Doesn't sound like much of a rip-off to me.
David F. Cox @mjgeek 9 April, 2010
mjgeek: Pity you did not get measures through to stop radio and TV stations supplying people who illegally record music on their computer.
Ray Boggiano 9 April, 2010
Certainly not a good thing for the music industry from what I understand. Nor democracy, nor the judiciary system, nor the digital economy.
Richard 9 April, 2010
Nice press release. Did all your journalists phone in sick this morning?
Ray Boggiano 9 April, 2010
@Adrian Zagoritis That resentment for your own fans and consumers is precisely why this Bill is so flawed. Yes, illegal downloads are common, but single sales have never been higher in the UK since records began. Many studies have also shown that those who download illegally spend more money on music, such as buying records, concert tickets, and merchandise. If you have a couple of spare minutes then please read my blog on why the music industry should focus on live music promotion at http://bit.ly/cmbzDZ. Cheers.
Lord of Music 9 April, 2010
There's a simple moral and philsophical truth at play here and it is this. Taking stuff that doesn't belong to you is wrong. Maybe the pirates will be forced to use other, more ingenious methods, but that doesn't mean rolling over and giving in. The DEB might not be perfect, but it is a good starting point otherwise all the talking we've had so far and are continuing to have is just that, talk.
king of the jungle 9 April, 2010
Lord of Music sounds like he's straight out of the House Of Lords - full of hot air and with no idea what he's talking about. Windbag!
Dave Cridland 9 April, 2010
Hey, nowhere am I saying that music (or video, or image, or greeting card) piracy is okay. I, too, earn my crust due to copyright. I'm saying that these measures to stop it are fatally flawed, both in as much as they'll fail to prevent piracy to any meaningful degree, and also have severe knock-on effects that'll damage the UK's economy and what leadership we have left in the Internet world.
Robert 9 April, 2010
A prime example of "democracy" at work. The House Of Commons had no more than 25 MPs in the chamber when the Bill was being "debated". Most MPs turned up to vote without hearing a single word spoken either for or against the Bill. The music industry would do well to think that this Act was passed as a convenience to get bills onto the statute rather than being fully debated.
Ian Penman 10 April, 2010
This bill is the work of fools. As new media specialist lawyers we have been advising on the effect of digital distribution on the content industries for 15 years. Unfortunately, virtually nobody we have met in the music industry understands how the technology actually works, nor how their beloved plastic records and CDs are now to be relgated to antique heirlooms. Existing encryption and IP address masking technology has made this bill utterly redundant before the Queen even gives it her Royal Assent. I suppose that there were many who tried to force the world to stick to horses when the combusion engine was invented, and doubtless there will be other who want to go back to horses (as opposed to harnessing another power source) when the oil runs out. What a shame that the music industry can only seem to employ luddites to fight for its survival when visionaries are so desperately needed. This bill changes nothing, and nothing has changed. Ian Penman, Partner, New Media Law, NoHo, London.
Susanna 10 April, 2010
I own thousands of records. I'm a writer, and know the importance and value of copyright. This law is seriously flawed and was rushed through with virtually no debate in the Commons. I shall be boycotting all products of BPI-member organisations from now on. I'm sure tens of thousands of others will be doing the same. Here's a handy list of BPI members - I've put it on my mobile phone to be able to easily check it wherever I am. http://www.bpi.co.uk/category/our-members.aspx There is plenty of really good music out there from non-members. So boycott it is!
Susanna 10 April, 2010
I own thousands of records. I'm a writer, and know the importance and value of copyright. This law is seriously flawed and was rushed through with virtually no debate in the Commons. I shall be boycotting all products of BPI-member organisations from now on. I'm sure tens of thousands of others will be doing the same. Here's a handy list of BPI members - I've put it on my mobile phone to be able to easily check it wherever I am. http://www.bpi.co.uk/category/our-members.aspx There is plenty of really good music out there from non-members. So boycott it is!
John 10 April, 2010
"Taylor believes the Digital Economy Act will be a key milestone in the development of the internet" - This will be a milestone alright, but not in the way that Taylor thinks. This is a disaster. It is so open to abuse. Goodbye freedom of information. Goodbye innocent until proven guilty. Welcome police state. We need to start work immediately on a new internet that is truly public and cannot be controlled via legislation. This legislation makes undemocratic control possible including blocking of important sites like wikileaks. Didn't politicians used to work for us? Not anymore it seems. We know which politicians must never be elected again. They are too stupid to manage our affairs in a digital age. List below. http://www.theyworkforthebpi.com/ John (MU member) PS I will start boycotting all payments that might end up in the hands of majors from today. What a sad day for creativity and freedom. Voting with pockets from now on. All my money goes to supporting independent artists. from now on
John 12 April, 2010
Susana, Thanks for the member list. It won't be too hard to create a web app that cross references to work out if a particular release relates to BPI members and then make it easy for people to make an informed choice about whether to buy or not. I will suggest it to my local freelancer association nearby where many web developers meet (I haven't met any that don't oppose this bill on both technical and moral grounds yet). Someone will keenly take on the work of building such a useful public information service for free. The spirit of the web must not be squashed. John (MU member)



:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Corabar Entertainment]

Thanks for that Mikeee - very interesting reading.

[MagicMusic]

The music industry related people who are whinging about this need to get a grip.

It is inevitable that there will be problems with certain aspects of the bill but something drastic had to be done.

All the lefty, freedom of information - bla bla bla commentators should shut it, they'd start an argument in an empty house anyway, the poor opressed victims that they are.:quiet:

I have mentioned in other posts on different threads that there is simply no other way to police this issue. If that stands on a few peoples toes - tough.

It may be flawed and there are sure to be ways around it but in my opinon it is a step in the right direction.

Some of the comparisons being suggested are ridiculous - China? Come on! :Censored:

Finally, perhaps it will set a precedent and legislate for proper policing of the internet and then we may finally see a clamp down on all of the vile, disgusting, content which goes unpunished.

EDIT: Having watched all of that video - it is very one sided.

[JTRS]

So I park up outside someones house and see if there is a wireless network in range. I find one and then use a packet sniffer to crack the WEP encryption (about 2 minutes), or the WPA2 encryption (about 4 minutes).

Then I download anything I want and drive away.

I do this 3 times and some innocent person gets their broadband disconnected whilst I carry on doing this.

The tech guy from Talk Talk demonstrated just how easy this is, when the MP chairing the debate said 'Wi-fi can be encrypted'.

Step in the right direction my foot

JTRS

[MagicMusic]

So I park up outside someones house and see if there is a wireless network in range. I find one and then use a packet sniffer to crack the WEP encryption (about 2 minutes), or the WPA2 encryption (about 4 minutes).

Then I download anything I want and drive away.

I do this 3 times and some innocent person gets their broadband disconnected whilst I carry on doing this.

The tech guy from Talk Talk demonstrated just how easy this is, when the MP chairing the debate said 'Wi-fi can be encrypted'.

Step in the right direction my foot

JTRS

And the chances of that happening are?

The guy from talk talk eh, now there's a thought - I wonder if he might have a vested interest?

What other way can internet piracy be tackled?

[JTRS]

And the chances of that happening are?

The guy from talk talk eh, now there's a thought - I wonder if he might have a vested interest?

What other way can internet piracy be tackled?

I'd look up wardriving if I were you, I also assumed that this would be a rare occurence, but it actually isn't.

Yes the guy from Talk Talk had a vested interest, he was demonstrating why cutting off their customers from the internet was/might be unfair and why this piece of 'rushed through' regulation was not fit for purpose

I agree that something has to be done, but I also think that it has to be the right something.

JTRS

[Corabar Entertainment]

I agree that something has to be done, but I also think that it has to be the right something.What would be your suggestions?

[MagicMusic]

My point is that everyone is prepared to just let it continue. There are obvious flaws with the legislation but now that it has been passed the issue will be tackled.

That, for me, is a step in the right direction.

And if some criminal loser wants to dip into my WiFi - so be it, life's too short in my opinion.

I would like those who protest to come up with a constructive solution to the problem rather than ranting about the big bad government and the "ooh that's not fair" attitude.

Its like the general political apathy "I don't care about politics or bother to vote" then rage on about the cost of fuel, living, local services bla bla bla...

Hitting people where it hurts is the only way to make an impact.

[Mark Wild]

something has to be done, but I also think that it has to be the right something.



Indeed and this isn't the right something at all, it needs more time. "Clause 17" seems very open to me for the goverment to do what they want with this bill in its later life, its to "future proof" it they say (my :Censored: )

What will happen to public wi-fi, will that be outlawed? Libraries? Universities? Internet Cafe's?

I have to agree with JTRS again in saying "something has to be done, but I also think that it has to be the right something." and this isn't it.




And if some criminal loser wants to dip into my WiFi - so be it, lifes too short in my opinion.


So then you are barred from any internet connection for life, how would that affect you? your business? kids schooling? so be it? I don't think you realise how important your internet connection is.

[rob1963]

Indeed and this isn't the right something at all, it needs more time. "Clause 17" seems very open to me for the goverment to do what they want with this bill in its later life, its to "future proof" it they say (my :Censored: )

What will happen to public wi-fi, will that be outlawed? Libraries? Universities? Internet Cafe's?

I have to agree with JTRS again in saying "something has to be done, but I also think that it has to be the right something." and this isn't it.


Agreed.

In reality, I just wonder how strongly this new law will be enforced...if at all.

There have been stories before about ISPs sending warning letters to illegal downloaders & threatening to cut them off, but nothing seems to have happened.

The laws concerning illegal use of copyrighted material have never been enforced very well, so I doubt this will change much.

[JTRS]

What would be your suggestions?

I have no idea what the right thing is, but I do know a bad thing when I see it, and this is potentially very bad, if it is enforced.


Agreed.

In reality, I just wonder how strongly this new law will be enforced...if at all.

There have been stories before about ISPs sending warning letters to illegal downloaders & threatening to cut them off, but nothing seems to have happened.

The laws concerning illegal use of copyrighted material have never been enforced very well, so I doubt this will change much.

I hope so, but then again that poor bloke from St Helens probably thought that about the extreme porn laws until the CPS took him to Court for a cartoon he had showing Frostie The Tiger saying 'Greaaaat Sex'

The problem is that if a bad piece of legislation exists or is introduced then there is the possibility it will get used.


JTRS

[simon1969]

You will never stamp out piracy or illegal downloading because of pirates being able to disguise there server address.
More investment into the guys who check out what c.d's you have would be beneficial only had 2 visits in 10 years !!!
For mobile discos etc!!!