bit-tech.net

Digital Economy Act appeal denied

Digital Economy Act appeal denied

The road is now open for the Digital Economy Bill's deployment.

ISPs BT and Talk Talk have had an application of appeal against their unsuccessful legal challenge of the Digital Economy Act denied, effectively ending the fight against the implementation of the controversial legislation.

Back in April High Court judge Justice Kenneth Parker threw out four of the five claims made by the ISPs as reasons that the bill was unenforceable and today Judge Richard Buxton refused the application for appeal against the ruling.

This now paves the way for the deployment of the bill's legislation, which threatens to cut off pirates of copyrighted material by monitoring and processing user's internet data. The bill was pushed through parliament in the final days of the Labour government in April 2010, causing consternation amongst internet users for the low MP turn-out and lack of scrutiny.

The government now has plans to send thousands of warning letters to accused internet pirates as soon as early 2011, with full implementation following later in 2011 across all ISPs.

Frustrated that the Digital Economy Act rumbles on? Or was such legislation inevitable? Let us know in the forums.

72 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Flanananagan 22nd June 2011, 14:53 Quote
Do these ***** in government know nothing?
Psytek 22nd June 2011, 14:57 Quote
The worst thing about this is, that because ISPs will have to spend a fortune on the equipment and ongoing monitoring, the price of broadband is going to go up for everyone.
Boogle 22nd June 2011, 15:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flanananagan
Do these ***** in government know nothing?

Quite the contrary. They want to know *everything*.
Sleepstreamer 22nd June 2011, 15:05 Quote
I was actually thinking of going to the UK to do some work next year, not sure if want to anymore tbh.
Bloody_Pete 22nd June 2011, 15:08 Quote
Yet another reason for me to leave when my degree is done...
Silver51 22nd June 2011, 15:13 Quote
"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time."

George-Orwell - 1984
RichCreedy 22nd June 2011, 15:19 Quote
if you or your family members don't pirate stuff, do you really have anything to worry about?

it's still up to the copyright holder to make the complaints to the isp, it is then up to the isp to keep a record of complaints, then warn customers involved, if a certain threshold is reached.

if the customers ignore the warnings, the copyright holder then has to apply to court to get the details of customers involved from the isp, at which point the isp must give the details, and then the copyright holder can take the customers to court, and request damages, and disconnection from the internet.

the secretary of state has the right to bypass the courts and remove internet services from anyone, if he/she see's fit.
McSteel 22nd June 2011, 15:43 Quote
So, if the government were to install cameras throughout your home, you wouldn't mind? After all, your household is home to a typical, boring family, with nothing of interest going on inside or out. I mean, if you're law-abiding and decent, how could it possibly hurt you?

... and don't even attempt to say that it's not the same - I'm well aware that it isn't. However, such a scenario is one step away. One little step. Think about it, how much could one hope to learn about you, if they could have access to your complete browsing, IM, e-shopping and e-mail history? Send any nudes out to girls lately?
leveller 22nd June 2011, 15:45 Quote
Great ... it was hard enough when the cats would sit on my desk watching me, now I'm going to be wondering if some 'observers' will be sat in their offices laughing at my donkey porn ...

Actually, not worried about this, as long as the monitoring stops at illegal activities like downloading movies/music and instructions on making bombs. Couldn't give a rats ass. As long as it is just that.

added: actually of course I'd prefer they didn't do this but we all knew the freedom to torrent anything was going to end sooner or later. I would assume their will be other things they are monitoring for as well.
Ayrto 22nd June 2011, 15:45 Quote
I'd be more worried about how this could affect speeds for everyday traffic, obviously many net connections are poor already. Idk, but could performance degradation be introduced by any filtering system?
ffjason 22nd June 2011, 15:45 Quote
The problem is that it gives legitimacy to false claims. Furthermore establishing if someone is a pirate isn't as straightforward as obtaining their ip address. These can be spoofed with ease and the current torrent monitoring systems are easily fooled. This will affect legitimate customers more often than pirates.

In addition to that, users who really want the content will use other methods, rapidshare sites, private torrent sites and the black net will become common place. Good luck following them when they don't want to be found.
nmunky 22nd June 2011, 15:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
if you or your family members don't pirate stuff, do you really have anything to worry about?

it's still up to the copyright holder to make the complaints to the isp, it is then up to the isp to keep a record of complaints, then warn customers involved, if a certain threshold is reached.

if the customers ignore the warnings, the copyright holder then has to apply to court to get the details of customers involved from the isp, at which point the isp must give the details, and then the copyright holder can take the customers to court, and request damages, and disconnection from the internet.

the secretary of state has the right to bypass the courts and remove internet services from anyone, if he/she see's fit.

Really?.. Really? If we don't pirate anything we have nothing to worry about?
How about the phrase "monitoring and processing user's internet data" is that something worth worrying about?

I'm not even going to go into the 'thin end of the wedge' argument I'm just going to point out that for this to actually work, all data has to be monitored all the time so that in case of a suspected offence the evidence can be retrieved. This is already the thick end of the wedge.

Given the robust stance of many in the House of Commons today that DNA profiles for arrested persons should be retained *even in the absence of conviction* do you really think that it will be long before stored internet data is trawled for other offences or suspicous behaviour profiles?

That this unimaginable level of monitoring is being pushed through to protect copyright is disproportionate at best and absolutely catastrophic at worst. Even if this is the ONLY way to protect copyright it is not worth it. I am not a pirate, I do think that copying music/movies whatever is wrong, but this is still too high a price to pay.

The blithe attitude of "if you haven't done wrong you don't have anything to worry about" is a flimsy shield and very, very blinkered.
Silver51 22nd June 2011, 15:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ffjason
The problem is that it gives legitimacy to false claims. Furthermore establishing if someone is a pirate isn't as straightforward as obtaining their ip address. ... This will affect legitimate customers more often than pirates.
...

Pretty much this. The RIAA in the past has sued children, old ladies, people without Internet connections and the dead for copyright infringement.
tudor 22nd June 2011, 16:14 Quote
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/06/22/leaked-uk-copyright.html

Or, in the words of Adam Smith: "Whenever the legislature attempts to regulate the differences between masters and their workmen, its counselors are always the masters." It seems that nothing changed in the last 300 years.
Bungletron 22nd June 2011, 16:15 Quote
I think I can here the lulz cannon spinning up...
fingerbob69 22nd June 2011, 16:16 Quote
What happened to me recently is that I had a (unemployed) mate come to stay for a three weeks. Turned out while I was at work, he was watching movies ...most of which hadn't been released let alone where still in the cinemas!

I found out when checking routinely checking our data usage and seeing that it had gone through the roof.

Now should I lose my net connection as punishment? Or should he at some future date? And who would believe it was him not me? Can you imagine the hassle and time needed to proove such?
DwarfKiller 22nd June 2011, 16:16 Quote
It's going to be hilarious getting a letter about piracy concerning things I genuinely own but find it quicker to download than it is to actually rip myself.
Evildead666 22nd June 2011, 16:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ffjason
The problem is that it gives legitimacy to false claims. Furthermore establishing if someone is a pirate isn't as straightforward as obtaining their ip address. These can be spoofed with ease and the current torrent monitoring systems are easily fooled. This will affect legitimate customers more often than pirates.

In addition to that, users who really want the content will use other methods, rapidshare sites, private torrent sites and the black net will become common place. Good luck following them when they don't want to be found.

I would expect the type of people the Police are trying to get, use other peoples Internet connections.
A lot of people haven't got a clue how to protect their WIFI, so they'll be wasting time and money putting old people and such into courts, which will yield nothing.
There is no prevention being done here, by which I mean, a proper solution, its more persecution and repression. Swing the bat and smack people down.
WarrenJ 22nd June 2011, 16:36 Quote
What about SSL? Will that be susceptible? As I wouldn't want my card details being logged for some lovely lulsec Muppet to find it all in one place.
Woodspoon 22nd June 2011, 16:36 Quote
The whole "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to worry about" defense of these sorts of things really annoys me, it seems to get used to justify just about everything, cctv, speed cameras, stop and search, most of which seem to have little effect on what their trying to prevent and cost loads to implement.
It's also a difficult argument to counter.

I wonder who gets in trouble if you live next door to McDonald's and you rape their free wifi for all it's worth?
el_diablo_72 22nd June 2011, 16:46 Quote
Ah, the joy of the Government holding free access to your data.

At least they did a good job with the:

1. NHS Database - F*cked and BILLIONS over budget.
2. Defence documents - Which tube did I leave that laptop on again?
3. Pensions details - I KNOW we lost 30 million of them but don't worry, the payment system doesn't work anyway!
4. Care home database - Pffftm they'll die off before we can update it anyway.

5. Did you know the armed forces/police/fire brigade, etc refused to take part in the DNA database as individuals - easy to remove their details from crime scenes - becasue they didn't trust the government with the details! Hello child support, we've got some live ones here!
Centy-face 22nd June 2011, 16:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver51
"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time."

George-Orwell - 1984

I think this pretty much sums up where we are heading and all the cries of "1984 was supposed to be fiction" are really ringing true.:(
RichCreedy 22nd June 2011, 16:50 Quote
the isp isn't going to monitor everyone, they will wait for copyright holders to complain first, then at an undisclosed threshold, send warning letters to customers flagged, it's not as straightforward as they are going to monitor everyone, and send everyone letters.
dactone 22nd June 2011, 16:57 Quote
strike anybody?
fingerbob69 22nd June 2011, 17:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodspoon
The whole "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to worry about" defense of these sorts of things really annoys me, it seems to get used to justify just about everything, cctv, speed cameras, stop and search, most of which seem to have little effect on what their trying to prevent and cost loads to implement.
It's also a difficult argument to counter.

I wonder who gets in trouble if you live next door to McDonald's and you rape their free wifi for all it's worth?

Mcdonalds. Their connection ...their responsibility to make sure it is used for legal purposes only.

Which of course it wont be so one of the first things to happen will be all those free wi-fi spots will disappear as providers seek protect themselves from prosecution in the only way possible ...by not providing it.
RichCreedy 22nd June 2011, 17:08 Quote
ok read this then explain where the problem is
dyzophoria 22nd June 2011, 17:09 Quote
with the recent hacking attacks, things like these would just give them the reason to push it through, yeah, thanks a lot to the hackers who are protecting the people
Cerberus90 22nd June 2011, 17:34 Quote
I suppose this is one good reason to be with TalkTalk at the moment, :D.

Didn't they say that they would never participate in this sort of thing. Whether that means they'll just stop providing broadband in the UK, :D.

I honestly don't see how it could be done. If internet usage is to be constantly stored, to be retrieved at a later date, just think how much data that would be for the whole UK. There's no way that they'd be able to store anything more than a week old, probably more like 1 day old, so nobodies going to be able to sift through the data to find anything in time before it gets deleted.
And constantly monitoring every packet is also not really viable. As someone else pointed out, the UK broadband infrastructure is already under par, adding in monitoring for every packet will just kill it.

With all the recent hackings, how is all this data ever going to be secure anyway, I mean if lulzsec managed to hack that unhackable site, they'll easily be able to get into the storage systems. And it couldn't be stored anonomously as that would defeat the point of storing the info in the first place.


Why are all the important decisions in this country.....no wait.......the world, made by people who have absolutly no idea about what they are really proposing?
Woodspoon 22nd June 2011, 17:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
ok read this then explain where the problem is

124A to 124N
Kasius 22nd June 2011, 17:49 Quote
BT and TalkTalk are quite correct. Having been in an ISP's employ myself it simply isn't possible to implement and providers will be required to sink hundreds of thousands of pounds into developing and deploying inefficient solutions that likely wont be up to the task anyway. This will put allot of companies whom fall short of the legislation standards of delivering basic inspection and monitoring out of business.

It should be the job of the copyright holders to police as it's their problem, not at the expense of the majority of the honest tax payers OR the internet providers.
Kasius 22nd June 2011, 17:50 Quote
There will be a reform once it falls on it's ass ;)
Bungletron 22nd June 2011, 18:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
ok read this then explain where the problem is

Honestly, I would not bother reading the act since it has been summised everywhere and particularly until the mechansim for enforcing the act has been firmly laid out, the ISPs are complaining that the act is unenforcable.

I agree that if you are not infringing copyright in an equitable world you should not be affected. The bit that gets me is there is a causel loop here: the ISPs are responsable to make sure copyright is not abused on their network, how do you do this without monitoring all the traffic? I have also heard that the ISPs will have to respond to to specific requests from copyright holders to give up infomation on users from IPs that they suspect of copyright theft. In this case a third party is telling them abuse is occuring therefore the ISPs were not monitoring copyright abuse, surely FAIL + fine time? This means that ISPs must get more intrusive, costs and customer charges will increase and there must be fears for user privacy once third parties are entitled to demand user information.
Jehla 22nd June 2011, 18:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by leveller

Actually, not worried about this, as long as the monitoring stops at illegal activities like downloading movies/music and instructions on making bombs. Couldn't give a rats ass. As long as it is just that.
.

Downloading information on how to build a bomb is illegal? How about how a gun works? I'm genuinely interested.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwarfKiller
It's going to be hilarious getting a letter about piracy concerning things I genuinely own but find it quicker to download than it is to actually rip myself.

I'm not sure if that's a legit defence, I know ripping DvDs is a grey area since you have to break encryption to do it. I also believe there is a conflict with EU law.
djab 22nd June 2011, 18:11 Quote
They just try to do like France and the "Hadopi".
Private companies check torrents then send IPs to the Hadopi. Then the Hadopi send IPs to ISPs who send back customers details. Hadopi the does the three strikes letter/disconnection (+ fine) thing.

An EPIC fail paid with the taxes of French people.
Technobod 22nd June 2011, 18:15 Quote
Now to see how long it is before they can demand to know the contents of an encrypted connection or before an i.p. = a person.

I can foresee the courts getting pretty busy if everyone stands up for their right of a free, fair and open trial...
RichCreedy 22nd June 2011, 18:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungletron
Honestly, I would not bother reading the act since it has been summised everywhere and particularly until the mechansim for enforcing the act has been firmly laid out, the ISPs are complaining that the act is unenforcable.

I agree that if you are not infringing copyright in an equitable world you should not be affected. The bit that gets me is there is a causel loop here: the ISPs are responsable to make sure copyright is not abused on their network, how do you do this without monitoring all the traffic? I have also heard that the ISPs will have to respond to to specific requests from copyright holders to give up infomation on users from IPs that they suspect of copyright theft. In this case a third party is telling them abuse is occuring therefore the ISPs were not monitoring copyright abuse, surely FAIL + fine time? This means that ISPs must get more intrusive, costs and customer charges will increase and there must be fears for user privacy once third parties are entitled to demand user information.

the problem with the summaries is that some important information is left out, hence, you should read it to understand the exact process, copyright holders have to inform within 1 month of the alleged infringement, they have to report it with proof, and all the required details, if any thing is missing from the report, it will be rejected.

there are other bits, like they cant get the customers details without going to court to get the details, again, they will need to prove the need first.

they can request infringement lists, which will not contain customer details, and for them this will form part of the evidence required for the court order

the infringement list will be made up of reports from copyright holders
feathers 22nd June 2011, 18:56 Quote
The solution for the end user is a national campaign where people boycott anything related to the music and video industry. In other words, don't buy any games or music or movies connected with the big corporations responsible for pushing this bill. If only people were smart enough to unite in this way but sadly the world is full of plebs and idiots who will continue to back the corporations no matter what.
feathers 22nd June 2011, 18:58 Quote
P. S. I guess a start would be for someone to draw up a list of corporations responsible for this bill and then get people nationwide to sign up and agree not to purchase anything published by these corporations.
RichCreedy 22nd June 2011, 19:07 Quote
with the peoples need for entertainment feathers it will never happen
Ayrto 22nd June 2011, 19:07 Quote
Just hope ISP's aren't planning on passing the cost on of implementing this to their customers.
feathers 22nd June 2011, 19:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
with the peoples need for entertainment feathers it will never happen

Agree. We are addicts who need constant supply of entertainment at any cost.
SexyHyde 22nd June 2011, 19:31 Quote
I don't infringe anyone's copyright, so should be worry free, but this just reminds me of the anti terror spying measures they brought in then councils were using them to track people suspected of dog fouling and parking infringements. This isn't paranoia it actually happened.
StoneyMahoney 22nd June 2011, 19:39 Quote
There is a way to sabotage this scheme. Generate as much traffic as you can between as many different nodes as possible. How many gig can you generate in a day? The monitoring won't keep up, the ISPs will go bananas and the government will be be held responsible for a country-wide clogging of every fat pipe and backbone running, provided we get enough people in on it. Screw lulzsec, we can do this ourselves and there ain't a damn thing anyone could ever charge us with.
Gunnerbob 22nd June 2011, 19:47 Quote
Here's an in-depth examination of the "You need only worry if you have something to hide" argument. It's quite good, should provide insight and retorts for everyone who wishes to fight this fallacious statement:

http://reallyducksoup.blogspot.com/2011/05/why-privacy-matters-even-if-you-have.html
Gigglebyte 22nd June 2011, 19:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SexyHyde
I don't infringe anyone's copyright, so should be worry free, but this just reminds me of the anti terror spying measures they brought in then councils were using them to track people suspected of dog fouling and parking infringements. This isn't paranoia it actually happened.

Indeed, they can use the cover of anti-copyright to pave their way into using the tools in the proposed legislation for other means. It's a dark time for the net as it has been slipping out of the 'control' of the corporations and governments then into the hands of the people, however we clearly cannot be trusted to run our net they need to 'protect us' by prosecuting us.
Aracos 22nd June 2011, 21:22 Quote
I can't wait to hear the reports of people watching stuff on youtube then receiving these letters confused as to what they've done. The material's copyrighted therefore they're technically infringing copyright by watching without buying a license to view the material.
nemo 22nd June 2011, 21:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by el_diablo_72
Ah, the joy of the Government holding free access to your data.

At least they did a good job with the:

1. NHS Database - F*cked and BILLIONS over budget.
2. Defence documents - Which tube did I leave that laptop on again?
3. Pensions details - I KNOW we lost 30 million of them but don't worry, the payment system doesn't work anyway!
4. Care home database - Pffftm they'll die off before we can update it anyway.

5. Did you know the armed forces/police/fire brigade, etc refused to take part in the DNA database as individuals - easy to remove their details from crime scenes - becasue they didn't trust the government with the details! Hello child support, we've got some live ones here!

LOL :D You forgot the LASCAD London Ambulance Service system fiasco :D

It's always entertaining to read about government IT project failures. Check out these two articles :
http://www.itpro.co.uk/616087/id-cards-and-the-worst-of-public-sector-it-failures

http://aberwiki.org/Government_IT_Failures
gilljoy 22nd June 2011, 22:27 Quote
This can only fail, there will always be a way of pirating stuff, its always been the way ever since media has been around.

Plus I dont particuarly like the govs track record on anything IT based lol
rollo 22nd June 2011, 22:34 Quote
Ssl encryption
FTP encryption
Private torrent sites ( there's thousands)
Proxy servers
Proxy addresses running between my ISP and china or some place

Didnt china try and stop google took pirates 20mins to bypass

So many ways to avoid this sorta stuff

I feel for the ISPs who will have to pay millions to try and contain this
Fizzban 22nd June 2011, 22:37 Quote
I just hope the ISP's don't have to monitor ALL traffic to catch people pirating. I don't want my bank account details logged. Or my Paypal account. In fact I don't want anything I do online logged and stored.

Imagine if they logged all the porn you've watched, or the conversations you were having with the person you are seeing behind your partners back. What a wonderful pile of things to blackmail someone with. Only takes one break-in by some hacker group. That or a dishonest employee.
sharpethunder 22nd June 2011, 22:42 Quote
well big brother is here its not enought that the watch us with the cctv in the citys they have to know what we do on the net.......... So i am thinking of living in a diffrent country
jimmyjj 22nd June 2011, 23:38 Quote
Tis a black day.
digitaldave 23rd June 2011, 00:43 Quote
let us not forget this was dodgy mandleson and the previous failed and shamed labour party who hurried this through weeks before they knew they would get booted out of government in the elections with their tails between their legs.
digitaldave 23rd June 2011, 00:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayrto
Just hope ISP's aren't planning on passing the cost on of implementing this to their customers.

*hope*

thats a bit nieve dont you think?

electricity bills up 10% to pay for the new offshore windfarm springs to mind, will they reduce the prices once the cheaper windfarms are online? give over.
Podge4 23rd June 2011, 02:02 Quote
Yahoo did a news story about the most pirated films.
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/blog/article/206149/most-pirated-films-ever.html

Avatar was downloaded 16.68 million times. Id like to see how they came to these figures. Total d/l's of the top ten - 104.87 million.
Flintsteal 23rd June 2011, 06:23 Quote
This is massive disappointment.
Now I'm curious if this loop hole the parliament has opened can be used for other purposes such as suspicion of other crimes where the evidence is purely circumstantial, if perhaps acquiring chat logs out of context or emails will be enough to get someone convicted or at least portrayed as a villain. Don’t forget if someone has a story printed about them saying he is evil because of abc and then later there is a reasonable explanation that clears his name this generally is too little too late the damage has been made and people’s opinions and relationships with that person have been irreversibly damaged.

For everyone who says that only pirates need to fear that might be true, initially... but these sort of things always seem to act as a cover behind some just cause such as stoping copy right infringement to cover ulterior motives, this will go further so that the majority of people can be monitored for whatever their reason is, there are heaps of conspiracy theories out their I’m not going to fuel that fire.

But I do believe my private chats, emails, internet activity should remain my business, just because others commit crime doesn’t mean the entire public should be treated as criminals and monitored.

For me this is just as bad as all my telephone conversations being recorded by my phone provider to only be accessed by court order because terrorists\criminals use phones to organise attacks, I doubt people would say that well only terrorists would need to fear this monitoring no there would be an uproar, well this is just as bad for me as all my communication not done face to face is via the internet.

This communication method is young in comparison and does have an exponentially higher potential then the phone, good and bad. It is natural to approach it with fear and think we have to put up these sort of policies but I would like to think that people would not want to fork over their right to privacy to help fine people who download content illegally.

Treating everyone as a criminal to prevent crime just isn’t right we shouldn’t be bringing up our kids saying don’t commit crime because you’ll get caught, we should be helping them identify the difference between right & wrong, so that through this nurturing they appreciate doing the right thing is the reward, in that it builds strong character.

Teach with treats not the stick or whatever the saying is.

Ah wells there is my rant on the topic no it means nothing but this just really p1ss3d me off.
Also sorry I suck at putting down my thoughts in writing just wanted to try.
ZERO <ibis> 23rd June 2011, 07:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ayrto
Just hope ISP's aren't planning on passing the cost on of implementing this to their customers.

No they will just absorb it and have their stock drop. Well there goes gramps retirement fund...

So yea the cost will and always is passed on. It is the same as taxes they do not do anything other than increase costs by shifting around where the money is.
xaser04 23rd June 2011, 10:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by el_diablo_72
Ah, the joy of the Government holding free access to your data.

At least they did a good job with the:

1. NHS Database - F*cked and BILLIONS over budget.
2. Defence documents - Which tube did I leave that laptop on again?
3. Pensions details - I KNOW we lost 30 million of them but don't worry, the payment system doesn't work anyway!
4. Care home database - Pffftm they'll die off before we can update it anyway.

5. Did you know the armed forces/police/fire brigade, etc refused to take part in the DNA database as individuals - easy to remove their details from crime scenes - becasue they didn't trust the government with the details! Hello child support, we've got some live ones here!

Don't forget about the HMRC cock up causing loads of people to have to pay more tax despite the fact that it was HMRC at fault.

The Governments record when it comes to anything remotely connected to IT is beyond pathetic.

What I really want to know is; where on earth will the funding come from for a bill like this? Obviously the ISP's will have to foot some of the bill but there will no be "incentives" from the government in return.

The country is in a dire financial situation yet here we have idiot MP's working on a pointless, unenforcable piece of legislation when they could actually be doing something useful..... actually who am I kidding.....
WarrenJ 23rd June 2011, 10:54 Quote
Can anyone guestimate what the bandwidth usage of the Whole UK is?

For what I believe will be a HUMONGOUS number, this could only be feasible if they monitored select user groups.

Imagine the storage that would be needed to keep all of this on record.
Denis_iii 23rd June 2011, 13:04 Quote
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/dutch-net-neutrality-first-in-eu-mobile-operators-side-eye-kpn/

The Netherlands looks the place to be, a government that does what is best for the ppl whereas UK government seems to do its best to assist corporations screwing the ppl.
lacuna 23rd June 2011, 13:40 Quote
Meh, not bothered. Its not possible to monitor everyone anyway.
shadows 23rd June 2011, 13:50 Quote
Great firewall of the UK anyone?

This isn't going to work, costs will be too much and once again the tax payer is paying to keep the record and film industries in profit. If they can't change with the modern times then they deserve to be left in the past.

Ed: In terms of failed gov IT projects, anyone remember the Firelink project? With the nine regional control centers?
faceplant 23rd June 2011, 14:20 Quote
i foresee central gov websites going tits up if you kow what i mean.

So theoretically 99.9% of users on the internet in the UK are about to be banned, I'd like to see the ISP's bottom line when ppl stop paying their monthly fee's. But I suspect if you do get banned new T&Cs will state you still have to pay your monthly fee until contract end.
leveller 23rd June 2011, 14:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faceplant
i foresee central gov websites going tits up if you kow what i mean.

Really?! Because from what I've seen, if you are a gamer then you've suffered, otherwise, dictatorships, toxic dumpers, arms dealers, Guantanamo ... all gone untouched ... go figure.
Waynio 23rd June 2011, 20:12 Quote
Hmmm, don't like & not for the piracy, couldn't give a bleep about that, it's the privacy invasion I don't like & in the name of the entertainment industry oh yeah that's a very entertaining thought all of us losing our privacy while at home relaxing just for them, not enough that we have cameras stalking us everywhere, now we're gonna have internet stalkers too .

Great fun .

As payback for this I refuse to buy movies/music/tv show packs but I'll keep supporting the games industry at least that's worth supporting.
AcidJiles 23rd June 2011, 22:11 Quote
I have written and sent this to my MP. Won't do anything I am sure but worth a shot.

I would like to tell you I am very disappointed with a lot of this governments' policies regarding technology matters. On so many of the issues the government not only doesn't seem to understand the salient points but also only listens to the narrow minded views of industry and business who themselves have not progressed with the technological revolution and who don't understand the market they find themselves in. They attempt to persuade the government to legislate on the Internet as if it were the original retail sphere which is hugely different from the state of the internet today and in the future.

The narrow minded backward-looking approach to this when innovation is so high reduces growth within the sector as well infringing on peoples' rights within this area just because it is new. Do not allow draconian and police-state laws a place within the UK just because it is within a sphere that most MPs do not have high level knowledge or understanding of. To enhance MPs' understand and knowledge you need to change who you talk to. The people you should be speaking to are not multi-national corporations who are stuck a decade or more in the past with their understanding of business on the net (RIAA, MPAA etc). Instead you should discuss the issues with those who actually know what is happening on the net and who understand the changes that are happening. These groups include start up Web firms taking part in Web 2.0, high level web-users such as moderators and admins for major social sites and advanced level internet users such as myself who take part in this new media with enthusiasm. Do not destroy the internet within the UK through short-sightedness and lack of understanding.

This a complex issue for which you need proper advice and explanation and currently all the goverment appears to receive is one sided requests for control from the group of people who know the least about how the internet is progressing and most importantly have not attempted to change despite years of innovation. The internet is a new medium, it needs new understanding, not old regulatory systems cobbled together into a restrictive nightmare. I hope you read this along with other requests and see to it that the real people who use the internet are not ignored under the thumb of repressive corporations.
AcidJiles 23rd June 2011, 22:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Podge4
Yahoo did a news story about the most pirated films.
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/blog/article/206149/most-pirated-films-ever.html

Avatar was downloaded 16.68 million times. Id like to see how they came to these figures. Total d/l's of the top ten - 104.87 million.

I don't doubt those numbers. Thing is a download doesn't equal a lost sale. There are no decent statistics on how many of these people would have bought avatar tickets or dvds if they didn't have the opportunity to download. Or how many did buy them after downloading.
Fizzban 23rd June 2011, 22:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJ
Can anyone guestimate what the bandwidth usage of the Whole UK is?

For what I believe will be a HUMONGOUS number, this could only be feasible if they monitored select user groups.

Imagine the storage that would be needed to keep all of this on record.

Must be enormous. I got 50 meg connection. I can download hundreds of gigs per week if I want, and that's just me (and my bro). I think hundreds of thousands of petabytes doesn't even come close.
Sloth 23rd June 2011, 23:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidJiles
I don't doubt those numbers. Thing is a download doesn't equal a lost sale. There are no decent statistics on how many of these people would have bought avatar tickets or dvds if they didn't have the opportunity to download. Or how many did buy them after downloading.
Each one of those is still copyright infringement, though. It's like double parking when no one else would have parked in the other spot anyway, can't prove either way but you're still in the wrong.

Sucks to be you guys. Hoping the US doesn't follow in the trend. I'm quite anti-piracy but this is not the way to go about stopping it.
warejon9 24th June 2011, 08:53 Quote
Hasn't there been a rumbling that it is actually against human rights to cut of internet? Read it somewhere, as France and another country are being taken to court.
AcidJiles 24th June 2011, 10:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidJiles
I don't doubt those numbers. Thing is a download doesn't equal a lost sale. There are no decent statistics on how many of these people would have bought avatar tickets or dvds if they didn't have the opportunity to download. Or how many did buy them after downloading.
Each one of those is still copyright infringement, though. It's like double parking when no one else would have parked in the other spot anyway, can't prove either way but you're still in the wrong.

Sucks to be you guys. Hoping the US doesn't follow in the trend. I'm quite anti-piracy but this is not the way to go about stopping it.

I'm afraid your analogy is flawed. The only way it would be like double parking is if you could extend the space at will to add a new car as there is no physical space lost. You haven't prevented someone else from using the space.
leveller 24th June 2011, 10:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
Sucks to be you guys. Hoping the US doesn't follow in the trend. I'm quite anti-piracy but this is not the way to go about stopping it.

One of my news feeds linked to a story saying you guys are following us. The RIAA etc pushing for the 3 strikes rule and monitoring. I can't locate it though, I have too many to search through.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums