Digital Economy Bill Passed In the UK 384
Grey Loki writes "The UK government forced through the controversial digital economy bill with the aid of the Conservative party last night, attaining a crucial third reading – which means it will get royal assent and become law – after just two hours of debate in the Commons."
Yup (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup, the UK is fucked.
Great news for solicitors! (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a whole new market to be claimed in no-win-no-fee IP chasers spitting out takedown notices like machinegun bullets.
Time to vote for the pirate party guys.
Re:Great news for solicitors! (Score:5, Insightful)
They will just add the Pirate Party to that list of blocked websites, along with Wikileaks. Can't have the Pirate party interfering with business interests of those in power, can we?
Re:It was a farce... (Score:4, Insightful)
On the ever so slightly bright side, there is still some question if the provisions to disconnect users purely on the basis of an accusation (which is essentially all that is required, given the poor standards of "evidence" required) would stand up to scrutiny in the European courts.
Of course, the UK government has a track record of completely ignoring the ECHR [guardian.co.uk], so don't count your chickens.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
The authoritarian/self-interested always win because the liberal/idealistic always factionalise. Those who believe they're taking the moral high ground will break away over minor details, while anyone who cares only about number one is prepared to compromise while there's strength in numbers.
So, why don't you take a leaf from the successful and lobby the Liberal Democrats? They're already far closer to you than Lab/Con.
Re:Yup (Score:5, Insightful)
They seriously need to stop trying to be like America...it's hazardous to their well-being :/
Last chance to hang in there? (Score:2, Insightful)
I know the Digital Economy Bill has some really far-reaching restrictions that could be imposed, but I can't say I'm surprised.
When you think about it, the US, the UK and most of Europe are 100% dependent on intellectual property now for their economic survival. Almost nothing at the consumer level is manufactured in these countries. All we produce is software, music, movies, video games and hardware designs. Protecting copyright when viewed through this lens makes a lot more sense now. It gives IP-related companies an advantage, but I'd say that's better than turning the entire country into an unemployed wasteland because companies don't want to produce material that's just going to get stolen.
Personally, I'd love it if someone woke up and realized that all of our eggs are in one basket, and took steps to diversify the economy...but I doubt that's gonig to happen. I'm for just enough of an import tarriff to balance things out and make manufacturing in this country make sense. Not everyone can be a "knowlege worker," the service sector is a crappy place to work, and we need manufacturing jobs for those who don't fit the office mold.
I honestly think free trade isn't a good idea when you have 300 million people with a grossly outsized standard of living competing with billions of others who live on way less. No one is going to give up their standard of living, so without some controls, we're totally screwed in the long run.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
How many UK citizens have enough money to even reach European courts after being disconnected?
More than you might expect, due to Legal Aid [legalservices.gov.uk].
*facepalm* (Score:3, Insightful)
Democracy is such a farse.
Re:Yup (Score:5, Insightful)
And I honestly can't see Virgin Media cutting off my internet because that'll mean they'll have to cut off the phone, cable TV (two boxes, DVR, HD, Sky Sports), mobile phone, case of wine once a year and everything else Branson might like to sell me for the next 50 years.
Re:Last chance to hang in there? (Score:1, Insightful)
Ever heard of cars, bikes, trucks, vans? Ever heard of the service sector, something that has always been a major part of the economy since we shipped clothing and dodad factories over seas in the 70s.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:4, Insightful)
You're not running a candidate in my area, but you would not get my vote if you were (and if we had an electoral system where voting for you wasn't a complete waste of time) because of this point:
A new right to share files (which provides free advertising that is essential for less-well-known artists).
Less well-known artists are already free to license their music under a CC-NC license and permit this if they think it benefits them. It is no more the government's job to enforce good business models than it is to prop up failed ones. The effects of this right would be destabilising the current system without proposing anything to replace it.
If you changed this to require compulsory licensing for copyrighted material at a fair and nondiscriminatory rate then I'd agree. Setting this rate at 0, as this policy does, makes you seem like you have absolutely no clue about economics, and we've just seen what happens when we elect politicians who don't understand economics.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not about left vs right, this is about technical sound laws vs impossible laws that will make everyone waste valuable time.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately I do not agree with the whole 'legalise non-commercial sharing' aspect, so the Pirate Party remains one I cannot support.
Then go take a lesson in economics [veryofficialblog.com] from the Grateful Dead, which were among the top-grossing bands [dead101.com] in North America for many years -- inspite of the RIAA and ClearChannel strangle hold on the radio market. It's all about business model. If your business model is to shovel shit, then of course artificial scarcity is needed, along with a monopoly on delivery channels and prevention of SMS'ing or tweeting bad reviews.
Re:Yup (Score:1, Insightful)
One more proof that government doesn't represent the interests of the masses, but those of the few, rich and powerful people.
Re:Last chance to hang in there? (Score:5, Insightful)
When you think about it, the US, the UK and most of Europe are 100% dependent on intellectual property now for their economic survival
Not true. We are dependent on the existence of an economic framework that makes the creation of non-physical goods cost effective. We are not dependent on a specific abstraction. Most software companies in the UK, for example, create software for specific customers on commission. This does not require the existence of copyright - their customer generally receives all of the rights to the code at the completion of the contract.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree much more with Plaid Cymru and the Green Party, but between them they only got 8.7% of the votes last time. Neither stands a chance of getting in this time, so a vote for them would be wasted.
As someone who resides in a country where the vast majority of voters think there are only two options, that statement makes me cry. It wounds me deeply.
I'll say to you the same thing I tell everyone else here in America: A vote is only wasted if you don't actually like who you're voting for.
How are other parties supposed to rise up and represent the people who share their values if the citizens won't vote for them "because they can't win?"
Re:Last chance to hang in there? (Score:3, Insightful)
"It gives IP-related companies an advantage, but I'd say that's better than turning the entire country into an unemployed wasteland because companies don't want to produce material that's just going to get stolen."
What fraction of the population are employed in IP content work? Very few. It's not like health care, education, food delivery, construction, etc. An IP economy concentrates great wealth in a very small number of hands, a feudal-like oligarchy; we've seen this as a fact over several decades now. If IP businesses were taxed at 80% and redistributed in a Marxist-like system, then maybe there would be a connection between IP and overall employment, but not as it stands today.
Labour just lost my vote (Score:5, Insightful)
The UK's darknet communities will be getting a whole lot bigger now. Forcing things underground is not a good thing. If it's cheap enough and the service is good people will pay! If you know the money is going to those doing the work, not middlemen, people will pay.
I'm angry about this. Labour are no longer a left party. I want the UK to move towards a European/German style model, not American.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:3, Insightful)
How are other parties supposed to rise up and represent the people who share their values if the citizens won't vote for them "because they can't win?"
Hear, hear.
Put more plainly, although other parties may not have a chance of winning outright this time around (or even next time etc.) by their very existence and presence they let alternative views get aired.
A vote for these parties is not wasted.
A vote for either of the major two parties is a vote for the status quo and therefore stagnation.
The mainstream policies of today were considered "loony" 50 years ago, radical 30 years ago and progressive 20 years ago. 10 years ago they looked fresh and exciting and "a real possible alternative."
Political change is slow, but voting for the more progressive less popular parties lets these ideas get out into the mainstream sooner.
Re:Just look at this bloody room... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is something I don't get about the way our political systems work (it's the same everywhere.) How is it a representative democracy if my representative isn't present to represent me during a vote which impacts me ? There should be a 90% attendance quorum for votes or better yet pay parliamentarians the median salary of the country and then dock their pay for each vote they missed.
Re:Yup (Score:4, Insightful)
They seriously need to stop trying to be like America...it's hazardous to their well-being :/
Yeah because Europe has been such a copyright utopia. Oh wait... Everyone complains about the copyright extension act that was passed in the US a few years back but the European one was far more heinous. Unlike the US version, the European one actually revived already-dead copyrights so that they could be extended as well. Oh and you remember the Berne Convention which requires world-wide recognition of copyrights of all signatory parties? Yeah that came out from European countries.
Oh and lest we forget our history about the DMCA. The DMCA was borne out of a treaties signed via WIPO and pushed by European countries. And you know who formed WIPO? Yeah that's right, European countries. So let's not pretend that European countries aren't just as complicit in all this copyright madness as the US is since Europe has been the driving force of much of it.
Re:Yup (Score:2, Insightful)
BTW, why is this being laid at the feet of the Tories in the article summary? Isn't Labour the ruling party right now? If they don't want it, then this doesn't pass.
It's not. The summary is only mentioning that this bill had huge support from the Tories and that the Tories helped to get the bill passed. What is wrong about pointing out that fact?
Re:Yup (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't advocate voting BNP or UKIP for one minute, they're the scum of the earth, but christ, I'm beginning to see now why so many people resort to them nowadays with the feeling of helplessness and lack of voice the British political system leaves people with.
Have you considered voting Pirate?
Re:Yup (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing is technically wrong with it, but the reading of the summary gives the impression that this was somehow caused by the Tories, because you see their party named in the summary and not Labour at all. Its just sort of weird that when talking about a law that was created, pushed through and ultimately passed by Labour that you don't even see the word "Labour" in the summary about it.
Re:Yup (Score:4, Insightful)
Carne Adovada, right here in New Mexico. (Sorry to bring out the big guns like that. Even all the rest of US is humbled by NM food, so it seems like it's unfair to use NM food as an example, but hey, we are part of the US.)
Re:Yup (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Brits - Contact your MP and then VOTE (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It was a farce... (Score:3, Insightful)
So now we're not voting for representatives in Parliament, but voting tactically in the hope that MPs will vote over the following four years not according to their manifesto but according to the views of people who didn't vote for them in the previous election?
IOW, you want a democracy where MPs do what will get them votes at the next election, rather than do what they promised?
Not quite (Score:5, Insightful)
It has to get through the House of Lords now, and there is a good chance that they will throw it out.
Re:Brits - Contact your MP and then VOTE (Score:4, Insightful)
If there is a Pirate Party candidate in your constituency, vote for them. If there isn't, then join the Pirate Party and offer to stand as a canditate.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
The effects of this right would be destabilising the current system without proposing anything to replace it.
Well, it does propose something to replace it. It's of less immediate economic value to the copyright holders, but it would be people sharing works alongside whatever authors and their publishers are doing (some people would buy copies rather than get free ones, for various reasons; look at how many public domain books there are in any decent bookstore).
If you changed this to require compulsory licensing for copyrighted material at a fair and nondiscriminatory rate then I'd agree.
Hm. Do you think that authors should get a cut whenever you lend, rent, or sell a used book? If you quote a line from Star Wars when you're hanging out with your friends, should you be required to put a few cents in the collection jar for authors, or face civil or criminal penalties?
Merely because it involves a creative work, or even money changing hands in conjunction with that work, that does not mean that copyright holders are entitled to a cut. Copyrights only make sense when they are as great an incentive as possible to authors to create and publish works that they otherwise would not, where the restrictions on the public are as minimal as possible in scope and duration, all in order to provide the greatest public benefit at the least public cost.
So long as the public would be better off, accounting for both the increase in freedom as to being able to engage in otherwise infringing behavior, and the possible decrease in the number of works created and published, such a change would be worth implementing.
Plus, legalizing file sharing -- if kept strictly non commercial, meaning no money changing hands, no advertising on sites engaged in sharing or anything related to it (e.g. trackers), no file sharing ratios of any sort, no donations or tip jars, etc. -- would bring the law into line with what are apparently our social norms of behavior. The law should generally reflect these, lest laws be seen as oppressive or unjust, not worth following or respecting. Bad laws engender disrespect not only for themselves, but for good laws as well. See the example of Prohibition in the US, where most people agreed at the outset that it would be good for society to ban alcohol, but the law was widely flouted, giving rise to massive amounts of official corruption, organized crime, violence, murder, etc. Sometimes laws that go against social norms are justified, e.g. the government breaking down segregation in the US against the wishes of much of the white majority in the South, but only if the issue is of pressing importance. I don't think that banning non-commercial file sharing by natural persons is more like desegregation than it is like Prohibition. Your opinion may differ.
Re:Yup (Score:3, Insightful)
If you watch the debate and look at the votes... They didn't even turn up!
There were 189 votes for and 47 against. 184 of the votes "for" came from the Labour party. The 9 conservatives and a handful of minority parties who showed up split more or less evenly, and 16 Liberal Democrats showed up to vote against. Pathetic, this isn't making anyone look good.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that for many people, there are two big parties, one they HATE, and the other which they just feel is incompetent or they only disagree with on a few points. Voting for a third party may mean they have thrown away their ability to try to stop the party they HATE from getting office.
I think this is cutting the voting for third parties by a far greater factor than people deciding not to vote.
What is needed is approval voting. Then you could vote for both the third parties you like and for the less-hideous of the main parties.
Re:It was a farce... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, the UK government has a track record of completely ignoring the ECHR. [guardian.co.uk]
Sigh. The UK government has never ignored a ECHR ruling. Not once. It can be a little slow getting round to enforcing a judgement that it doesn't like; that is sadly common, in that the court lacks effective ways of enforcing it itself. Not unique to the UK though.
Remember This (Score:2, Insightful)
Would they be sued into oblivion and possibly forced to take down their servers in the process? Absolutely. Would the US set up their own blocking mechanisms? No. This is ridiculous. Blocking "a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright" ? Seriously? I mean our government is pretty retarded sometimes but even they wouldn't get away with THAT. Remember countries like Australia, China, and the UK are part of the UN. Remember that when you think of handing them control. They all have a say. I'm not one of those "AMERICA FUCK YEAH!" type people, but this is one of those times where I truly believe something is done best here.
The first amendment is the first one for a reason. We may not always do it in the best way but honestly? We still do it better than most other countries. The keys to the internet should be held by the country least likely to censor the shit out of it. I do not trust the UN or any other body to do that and I do actually believe in the UN for other things. This is one of those things though that cannot be compromised on. The internet must stay free. If the US ever were to threaten that, THEN I would be 100% for giving control over to whoever will mess it up less.
Re:Yup (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yup (Score:2, Insightful)
Working tastebuds? I thought the general consensis was that UK food is appallingly bad compared to pretty much any other European country. France, Italy, Greece, even Germany... but I don't think I've heard anyone rave of the UKs food.
Anyway... working tastebuds? Then please explain haggas.