Cut off in their prime (part 2)
The proposed ban on access to the internet for repeat offences related to illegal downloading, announced yesteday, drew criticism from both civil rights groups and internet service providers.
Treasury Minister Stephen Timms said that previous plans to restrict users’ broadband speed didn’t go far enough. Instead the Government proposed the possibility of blocking offenders’ access to download sites as well as banning them from the Internet altogether.
The Open Rights Group, which protects civil liberties in the area of digital technology, said any suspension would “restrict people’s fundamental right to freedom of expression.”
The British proposals shine a spotlight on those Internet Service Providers (ISPs) which host file-swapping sites and requires them to identify and take action against offenders.
The new government proposals require ISPs to issue written warnings to subscribers whose IP address has been spotted on an illegal download site. Copyright holders would use court orders to access details of any warnings issued by the ISPs, leading to the possibility of civil lawsuita against a suspected offender.
It is relatively easy for determined filesharers to mask their identity or their activity to avoid detection. In addition, ISPs are understandably uneasy at being asked to ‘police’ the Internet and their members’ Internet usage in this way. Moreover, there is the blurred issue of content that is available to copy, and defining that from among the massive proliferation of content online will be an expensive and ongoing process. As usual, the costs of administering such a scheme will fall to ISPs as will the burden of having to explain to users why their connections have been terminated.
The Open Rights Group, which protects civil liberties in the area of digital technology, said any suspension would “restrict people’s fundamental right to freedom of expression.”
But the British Phonographic Industry, which represents the recorded music industry, said the move was “a step forward that should help the legal digital market to grow for consumers.”
As we reported when the Government’s Digital Britain report was released, this is a sledgehammer to crack a nut in that it appears to crompomise all our right to privacy to protect commercial interests.
Related Article – File Sharing: The Risks
UPDATE
In a letter to the Guardian today (27 August 2009), Lord Mandelson has denied that his meeting with David Geffen influenced the government move to cut-off illegal peer-to-peer filesharers from their internet connections.
He wrote: “The subject of internet piracy was not discussed during our meeting”
“Work on this started long before my holiday in August, with officials submitting advice to DCMS ministers and myself on 3 July. This set out a possible change in thinking and was not the result of any single conversation but followed engagement with a wide range of stakeholders.”













Lord above, WHAT is wrong with this shower of polticians? They want us to have slow speed broadband at a low cost but also wants ISPs to foot the bill for all manner of snooping and associated shenanigans – truly maddening and hardly championing excellence, freedom of access to the internet or the media and creative industries’ expansion.
If Peter Mandelson was one of mine, he’d have had a hard smack well before now.
Comment by Digital Granny — August 27, 2009 @ 10:39 am
This government will be thrown out at the next election. This is just an other hair brained idea from them. People would leave isps by the million.
Comment by david colbert — September 9, 2009 @ 12:18 pm