CULTURE SECRETARY Ben Bradshaw has revealed that, due to strong opposition, measures to tackle illegal filesharing will be watered down.
Under the new scheme copyright holders will need a court order before they can punish persistent illegal filesharers.
This differs from the action that had been suggested by business secretary Lord Mandelson earlier this year, coincidentally just after having spent time as a guest of music publisher David Geffen in Greece.
Mandy had said that Internet service providers would be forced to hand over to music companies and film studios information on customers who used illegal filesharing sites so that they could take action.
This original tactic was seen by many as being too heavy-handed. Now those targeted would also have the right to appeal.
Bradshaw told the House of Common's culture, media and sport committee that this measure is to protect innocent people who could be cut off from the Internet 'willy nilly', merely if they were accused.
Bradshaw said, "The suspension... would be as a very last resort for serial and serious infringement, [and] would be subject to a strict two-stage process."
A court order would come at the end of the process and would not be needed in the vast majority of cases. He said that secondly there would be a right of appeal. This lighter solution is likely to be contained in a Digital Britain bill this year.
Deloitte Media Partner James Alexander said, "It is excellent that the Digital Britain bill will try to tackle illegal file sharing, it simply cannot be ignored. Unfortunately there is no silver bullet for finding the filesharers that are really costing businesses.
"This scheme will certainly deter the naive who do not realise that they are acting illegally. However the more technically savvy will have sophisticated protective measures to stop them being found. It is this element that is costing music and film industries a lot of money. Going in with a blunt instrument results in greater effort and greater costs to the taxpayer."
Downloading content illegally will earn you a strongly worded warning letter at present. Internet service providers and content owners have long been in dispute about whether ISPs should hand over confidential information about their customers, and who should meet the cost of disconnecting them. µ
The record labels weren't happy with just ripping off artists. Now they want the government in all Countries to chase the ppl who figured out how to rip them off.
With everyone's tax money. Not everyone downloads movies and music. In fact it's a very small percentage of the population, but they think every tax payer should foot the bill to save their failing business model.
They are like highwaymen who, now that so many people know where they are and are bypassing them, want the Government to legislate that all travellers are to pass their way.
any other site on the internet.
who exactly is it in the EU and UK that wants to take way and refuse our right to to assumed innocence until proven guilty....
and more so, how exactly does this PR UK news announcement effect the European Parliament obliged to get a shift on with reform
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/22/telecoms_package/
and who exactly are these people
that refuse to ratify the EU directive.
"
"No restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end users without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities … save when public security is threatened," said the amendment.
....
"
please NAME those EU Parliament and Council representatives refusing to ratify the directive to our right to assumed innocence until proven guilty....
and please supply and direct us all to the EU freedom of information act data as relates to these prior AND coming meetings and related data, and provide a full news report timeline etc.....
These two posts are absolutely spot on.