Ethics is a county of England where the girls wear Eva Glass slippers
|
|
|
Ofcom is in charge of Digital Economy scrutiny
UK TELECOMS WATCHDOG Ofcom has been put in charge of drawing up the code of practice for implementing the controversial Digital Economy Act.
The regulatory body said that the Act, which everyone except Feargal Sharkey and the government thinks is crazy, has created a number of new responsibilities for it, not least of all how to tackle 'unlawful filesharing' via peer-to-peer (P2P) networks. Therefore it is turning to interested parties, who it expects will help it manage the Act in the best way.
Unfortunately Ofcom does not have the power to set the Act on fire and hurl it out a window, but we can all hope that it decides to oversee the law's requirements in the most sensible way possible.
Ofcom will ask Internet service providers (ISPs) to notify web users if they suspect that the users' accounts have been used for filesharing, and will insist that they retain a list of those customers that have had 'multiple unchallenged notifications'. It explained that broadband subscribers should be given information on what they were being accused of, insisting that this should let them dispute their cases through a 'robust and effective' appeals mechanism, once the copyright lawyers come knocking.
Copyright holders will not be able to march about, demanding ISP subscriber details, though, and will only be granted access to personal information after a court order has been granted. Ofcom added that this should be done in such a way that it upholds data protection laws.
Ofcom said that it could either draw up a draft code of conduct or let the industry dictate one. Please, for the sake of common sense, let's all hope it goes with the former option. A draft code should be released by May this year.
Ofcom also plans to produce quarterly reports, in which it expects to be able to comment on levels of filesharing and the extent of legal action.
If the Big Media MAFIAA get their way, we expect that analysing the latter will take up most of Ofcom's time. µ
Share this:
Share
Sorry folks, I pasted the wrong link in the previous post. The link that details an interview with the BPI where the BPI clearly state their intentions to start volume litigation against UK citizens accused (not proven guilty) of illicit filesharing is here:
http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i33e34f97cdbeee3e393bbf3300f0bb5c
"Somehow 'I told you so' just doesn't cut it"
I have tried to warn people, but no-one would listen. Behold the wave of litigation about to be unleashed onto normal everyday UK citizens:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/comment/1601070/ofcom-charge-digital-economy-scrutiny
Everyday parents and teenagers being told by our leaders as sharing with other people, countries, less fortunate is good. Teenagers don’t understand what is wrong and what is different between borrowing CD or DVD to friend or uploading or downloading files. We have enough fight at our homes already, and punishing parents will create unsustainable environment and parents will cut children from internet. How many teenagers committed suicide after being denied computer game or internet already? This Bill will be a very big mistake in Not So Great Britain.
i would think it more likely that the BPI, and big corporate music/media offices along with those litigation lawyers offices will the first buildings to be torched when the British public finally turn on this totally corrupt government. (which is due possibly sometime later this year)
The Digital Economy Act of 2010 will make the majority of UK citizens nothing more than "litigation fodder" for large corporates owning copyrights.
What people don't seem to comprehend is that "technical measures" and "civil law suit" are not mutually exclusive. Once a company (usually a law firm) representing the interests of a rights holder obtains the personal details of the owner of an IP address that happens to be in a torrent swarm, then the "accused" person will also receive a letter saying: "You've been a very naughty boy/girl, pay us £500 (or whatever) or we will take you to court where you will have to pay much more".
The Digital Economy Act 2010 is opening the doors to a wave of litigation, and there will be many miscarriages of justice simply because the owner of the IP address will be "The Accused".
Think about the demographic that will be most affected: parents who have one or more children aged 14 (or so) and above. It simply isn't possible for good honest hard working parents to monitor EVERYTHING their children are doing online. If one (or more) of their children engaged in illicit file sharing, it is the parent who will be accused and punished.
Sharing WiFi in the UK just became a very risky thing to do (be it with family, friends, study buddies, whoever).
I was so shocked at the display of so called "British democracy" (i.e. the "wash-up") when the bill was debated that I have decided to boycott the BPI:
http://bpiboycott.wordpress.com/
If you're a parent or a hard working honest citizen who doesn't engage in illicit file sharing and you receiving a letter through the door accusing you of being involved in such (or worse - demanding that you pay money for being involved in such), will you know how to prove that you didn't? This legislation will deem you guilty on the say-so of the rights holder!
Good luck "Digital Britain" (what a joke).