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.
Re:Yup (Score:5, Insightful)
They seriously need to stop trying to be like America...it's hazardous to their well-being :/
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: (Score:2)
Re:Yup (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, despite the best efforts, Britain is still quite a way behind on horrific industrial farming and junk food provision. We have a long way to go before we have a Smithfield of our own. Only animal welfare regulation, and working tastebuds, hold us back from achieving the dream.
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yup (Score:4, Funny)
Name one food that the US manages to do better than the UK in. Just one.
High fructose corn syrup.
-
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: (Score:2, Troll)
They seriously need to stop trying to be like America...it's hazardous to their well-being :/
It's the other way around. American should stop trying to be like Britain, with a crippling welfare state and a political system with fewer checks and balances in the government.
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.
Re: (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: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: (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: (Score:2, Flamebait)
US DMCA: 1998 [wikipedia.org]
UK: Copyright, Designs and Patents Act: 1988 [wikipedia.org]
Hush now, grown ups are talking. You still have a lot to learn about oppressing your populace.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
*facepalm* (Score:3, Insightful)
Democracy is such a farse.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say get wealthy, start a political party that wants to revert back all laws to where it started and get elected. That is democracy!
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy is such a farse.
No, the UK is such a farce and apparently not much of a democracy.
Re:Yup (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem for the politicians is that it doesn't really matter what laws they pass. They'll never find a way now to completely prevent me gaining internet access and downloading or accessing whatever I want.
Christ, even people in our jails keep managing to find their way online with smuggled smartphones and stuff.
This news really sucks, but ultimately it's just another battle the content industry thinks they've won, but have completely and utterly lost. Each time this happens I decrease the amount of content like DVDs I buy, and simply to make a point, I'm now decreasing it to none, and shall download all the content I'd otherwise consume instead. If the political process is this far fucked (I actually watched the stich up last night) then, well, fuck the political process.
Really, they wonder why so many people don't vote, and so many vote for extremists whilst completely and utterly ignoring reasoned debate, peaceful political activisim such as writing your MPs en-masse, providing evidence that demonstrates why the laws are unquestionably flawed and so forth? If you leave people with the choice of apathy towards politics or supporting extremism to get their voice heard then it's no wonder people who want their voice heard flock to the growing far right. The rise of the far right in the UK is squarely on Labour and the Tories shoulders, they are entirely without question to blame for the situation the UK is in right.
They should be utterly ashamed of themselves that despite being caught en-masse as being completely and utterly corrupt this past couple of years stealing from the public coffer, despite seeing a massive rise in support of the far right (UKIP and the BNP), they still haven't learnt their lesson in the slightest. They're still pursuing a path of ignoring the populace, taking bribes, focussing entirely on self interest and so forth. Honestly, the death penalty wouldn't even be good enough for politicians so utterly willing to sell out their country and it's citizens and causing so much misery in the process for their own personal gain.
As much as I dislike the DEB being passed, I could care less about it because it has zero actual effect on me, and will only harm innocent people- hopefully enough to make them start caring and actually fight back. What fucks me off is the blatant and rampant corruption amongst British politicians, and the way the British political landscape is so utterly fucked, that for many, the far right is the only way to make themselves heard and even that's still not enough for many politicians. It's utterly wrong, people should be heard without having to support extremism, or themselves being rich enough to find money to bribe politicians.
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.
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: (Score:3, Informative)
They're not generally an option for me, and even if they were running in my constituency it wouldn't matter, being probably one of, if not the safest Labour seats in the country. I don't really have a vote because of our first past the post system, I get to turn up put my little slip in the ballot box, but it's not really a vote, it doesn't really actually matter, it's just something to pacify me as a mere citizen of the state.
At least if we had a PR system I might be able to vote, but as it stands, I'm eff
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you have to try. If you don't make the small effort to put your slip in the ballot box then I think you also throw away your moral right to complain about who gets in. Unless you are confined to bed with a serious illness then it is sheer idleness not to try. Post a spoiled ballot if you must: they provide amusement to the tellers and returning officers.
I rarely get to see the candidate that I want elected, and nearly always have to vote tactically. However, it seems that the UK electorate is so
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem is, Labour have a majority of around 14,000 here.
Even if my entire village voted for the next closest candidate, it still wouldn't matter, because he has the mining villages for life.
I do vote still, but I feel it's pointless, because my vote is no different to having no vote whatsoever.
I'm very pro-EU because as the EU is based on PR, despite the fact my vote in the European elections is diluted amongst a few hundred thousand people that's still a vote that actually has some value.
It's sad that
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Mining villages can be persuaded to vote for a party other than Labour. See Blenau Gwent for example.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I did. However, the fact that you guys endorse bullying cunts like Eric turned me, and plenty of other people, off. So, fuck you. If you were running in my constituency, I wouldn't vote for you. I'm voting Lib Dem.
I still support the global Pirate Party movement, but the PPUK is run by a bunch of assholes. It's a shame, but I don't consider it representative of the pirate movement.
You, Peter, are one of the guys I hold responsible. If you gave a shit about new people's views not being shouted down and
Re: (Score:2)
So basically the same way government has worked since the beginning of governments?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Likewise - "it was going to be you, until you let he Digital Economy Bill through"
It was a farce... (Score:5, Interesting)
Everyone that watched the debate last night was pretty horrified at how broken the "wash up" process was, and how obviously this bill was pushed through by the front benches without the support of the backbench MPs present. Labour were responsible for 97% of the MPs that gave a yes vote, because those Labour MPs that didn't would have faced severe consequences, perhaps even eviction from the party. Some rebel Labour MPs did vote against, Tom Watson leading them, this guy deserves serious respect for standing up for what he believes despite the pressure.
The election is coming and we need to take away power from these corrupt parties (the other two major parties are hardly blameless, although the Liberal Democrats did at least vote against). Support the Open Rights Group and also support the Pirate Party UK who are currently raising money to field candidates. You can donate to the Pirate Party here if you are so inclined: http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/party/donate/ [pirateparty.org.uk]
My MP voted for the bill, so I'm going to vote against in the next election, I'd urge people to do the same, find out if your MP voted and which way by going here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/32.htm#hddr_2 [parliament.uk]
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Interesting)
You can also read our manifesto [pirateparty.org.uk] and see a list of our PPCs [pirateparty.org.uk] -- maybe we're running a candidate in your area?
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:It was a farce... (Score:5, Interesting)
More importantly, the Liberal Democrats are heavily pushing electoral reform, and have been for several decades. Now the two major parties are looking like they will accept it after the next election too. In my constituency, labour won the last election by about 10% of the popular vote. Their old candidate is standing down and they are dropping in someone who just lost his seat and was one of the worst offenders in the expenses scandal, so it seems pretty unlikely that they will win next time. Conservatives only got 16% last time, but the Lib Dems look like they've got a chance, and I only mildly disagree with them.
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. Meanwhile, Plaid has around a quarter of the Welsh EU parliament and Welsh Assembly seats. With a proportional representation system, a vote for them would be worthwhile. With an STV or AV system, I could vote for them first and Lib Dems second.
I don't especially want to vote for the Lib Dems, but I do want to vote against Labour and the Conservatives. Hopefully this time we can get a hung parliament and the Lib Dems can push through some electoral reforms. Then I can vote for a party that I actually want next time.
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: (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 mains
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: (Score:2)
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?"
They're not. Apply a little basic game theory to the US election system, and you'll see that a two-party system will always emerge. It's the only stable result.
You'd need to change the rules under which the US government is selected and operated before 3rd parties could become viable. Instant runoff voting would be a good start, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
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?"
How indeed. Popular anti-government movements do seem to get going, but they end up being hijacked by weirdos and discredited in the media. Like those Tea Party people (teabaggers, lol) or Ron Paul supporters (paultards, lolololol). If the Pirate Party ever becomes a really big movement, it will end up in a similar place.
And meanwhile control is passed from o
Re: (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?
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: (Score:3, Informative)
Factionalisation is only a problem in the UK electoral system because it's not truly democratic (read: not using proportional representation).
In any real Democracy with a proportional system where all votes count the same, many smallish parties together can be as powerful as one big party as long as the total of votes they recieved is more than the votes that the big party got.
In the UK, a party can get a parlimentary absolute majority (more than half the seats) with only 35% of the vote: How Democratic is
Re:It was a farce... (Score:4, Informative)
In the UK, a party can get a parlimentary absolute majority (more than half the seats) with only 35% of the vote: How Democratic is it when the voice of a third of the people is more important than that of the other 2 thirds ...
It's actually much lower than that. To get a majority, you need 50% of the seats plus one, which works out at 50.15% of the seats. Each of these seats is contested on a first-past-the-post basis, meaning that you only need to get more votes than anyone else. This means that, if only two parties stand, you could get a majority with only 25.8% of the vote. Typically, however, you get five or six candidates, with the top two getting around 30-40%, the second place getting 20% and the rest of the vote being split among others. This means that you can generally win a seat with only about 35% of the vote, giving you 17.5% of the overall popular vote.
Note, however, that voter turnout is only around 65% in a general election, so you can win a majority in Parliament if only a little over 10% of the eligible electorate vote for you, as long as it's the right 10%. Some votes are more equal than others.
Re: (Score:2)
So, why don't you take a leaf from the successful and lobby the Liberal Democrats?
Splitters!
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Dixie Chix (Score:3, Interesting)
Try and get air time. You can't. That's control of the delivery channels. When Prince broke with the labels, he disappeared, no air time. The labels need a monopoly on the delivery channels to prevent real music. The way the media shutdown Dixie Chix over politics [wsws.org] is a lesson in both the level of control and of the political nature of today's media.
A new paragraph or sentence would make clear that the RIAA / MPAA whine about reviews is a separate item.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Informative)
As a PPUK PPC, I'm more than happy to answer any questions Slashdotters have about PPUK, our policies or how much The Digital Economy Bill sucks...
Here's a bit about me:
http://thenextweb.com/uk/2010/04/08/pirate-party-uk/ [thenextweb.com]
http://www.tdobson.net/node/409 [tdobson.net]
Re: (Score:2)
PPCs? If you have Particle Projection Cannons [wikipedia.org], why not just march your BattleMechs into Parliament and show them who is boss?
OOohh ok.. For the UK-Politics Impaired, like me, PPCs are Prospective Parliamentary Candidates [wikipedia.org]. I guess that makes more sense.. but I like my idea more.
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)
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: (Score:2, Interesting)
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: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
How many UK citizens have enough money to even reach European courts after being disconnected?
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].
Re:It was a farce... (Score:5, Informative)
Link moved, here is where you can find the MP votes: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm100407/debtext/100407-0032.htm#1004088001556 [parliament.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Just look at this bloody room... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (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.
Hmm (Score:2)
There are currently 646 MPs in the house of commons. Not that I'm cynical or anything but was this bill brought through the house at the beginning of a general election campaign for a reason?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So does Parliment not have the equivalent of a quorum call? Many institutions require at least half the voting members to be present to pass something, if any of the voting members present asks for a quorum check.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
if any of the voting members present asks for a quorum check
That seems to be the rub. If no one really cares to ask, doesn't really matter, does it?
Re: (Score:2)
"Not that I'm cynical or anything but was this bill brought through the house at the beginning of a general election campaign for a reason?"
Yes, it's nearly summer and Peter Mandelson needed to make sure he fulfilled his obligations to the music industry in time to ensure he could go on another all expenses paid holiday on a yacht in Corfu again over the summer period.
Correct. Almost all Conservative MPs abstained. (Score:5, Informative)
AC wrote:
>Can someone explain this to us unfamiliar with British law & politics:
>out of all 646 MPs, only 189 + 47 == 236 of them voted Y/N?
>That's only 36.5% of them. What about the rest? All abstained from voting?"
Correct. Almost all 193 Conservative MPs abstained (in the UK parliament, didn't turn up == abstained).
Of the Conservatives that did vote, more voted against (5) than for (4).
Not that it would have made any difference, since Labour have a majority (this month).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's obviously not an issue that the Conservatives feel strongly about, otherwise all of them would have been told to turn up and vote in a particular way.
Therefore, the Conservative leadership did help this bill to pass, by doing nothing to block it. The headline is accurate.
That reminds me of something. Let me think. Oh yes, it's the Conservative voting record, where they supported every nasty little illberal and authoritarian thing that Labour wanted during the last decade. Some "opposition" they are.
FYI: (Score:2, Funny)
Peter Mandelson is evil incarcerated.
Re:FYI: (Score:5, Informative)
No, we just wish he was incarcerated.
PS. I think the word you were actually looking for is "incarnate", but nice Freudian slip.
Re:FYI: (Score:4, Funny)
I wish he was incinerated.
Can the MP's be accused? (Score:5, Interesting)
And their families, their friends, their secretaries, their PA's?
They need to feel the pinch of this insane law. And fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Go one step further and claim "someone" in Buckingham Palace has been stealing your music or whatever. Watch hilarity ensue.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Job done!
Erm... (Score:2, Informative)
Dear dear, you believed something you read in the Guardian. Shame on you.
Actually the law has not passed, it still has to go to the Lords tonight. Not saying it won't pass there - it almost certainly will - just that the story is hopelessly wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not quite (Score:4, Informative)
In this case, if the Lords do block it, which is possible but relatively unlikely, AND there's no time left for the Commons to overturn the Lords' vote, which is possible and fairly likely as the Mandybill is the last of the wash-up bills to be debated in the Lords, then it will fail, as the current Parliament will be dissolved. Unfinished bills can be carried from one annual session of a Parliament to the next, but can't be carried from one Parliament to another. If the above, admittedly not likely, scenario takes place, then even if Labour do get re-elected with a Commons majority, they'd have to re-introduce the Mandybill from scratch.
Also, not applying to this bill I beleive, but generally any bill that begins in the House of Lords can be thrown out by the Lords and the Commons can't override this. That's why if the government has any sense they always start likely to be controversial bills in the Commons.
Tragic would be an apt way to describe it (Score:5, Interesting)
Essentially, from what I read (correct me if something changed in the final bill), a copyright holder can accuse you of pirating anything without evidence, and your provider must throttle/disconnect you. If you want to counter, you have to take me to court, at your cost, with real evidence that you didn't.
This is so mind bogglingly dumb I can't begin to fathom how they plan to enforce this without mass disconnections. Huge numbers of people with open APs or just kids in the house are going to find themselves without internet access. Antipiracy firms will make mistakes about IPs, but hey- it doesn't matter when you require no evidence.
Still, I was discussing it with many people last night who were "thankful that they were not British". Stuff like this is closer than we think with ACTA being pushed behind closed doors.
Re:Tragic would be an apt way to describe it (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not convinced this is true. My understanding of it was that they would have to catch you actually doing it (although I'm sure you could claim entrapment on that) and give you a warning through your ISP. Then they would be able to tell your ISP to cut your internet connection off if they caught you doing it again.
Not that I want to get into a debate about whether it should or shouldn't be illegal or not. Given that it is, this seems to be a fairly sensible way of policing it. It may appear that they are being heavy handed with the threats (to satisfy those who think it is a problem), they can also get away with minimal policing and catching the biggest offenders.
Citation: Section 124A, section 3c of the bill [parliament.uk]
Re:Tragic would be an apt way to describe it (Score:4, Informative)
I haven't read through all the explanatory notes that cover the bill so I can't comment on the requirements when it comes to throttling/disconnection. But the copyright holder is required to provide evidence of 'apparent infringement' even at the stage where only letters are being sent.
From the Digital Economy Bill explanatory notes, note 47 [parliament.uk] (emphasis mine):
What concerns me is that this part of the law seems to be very much written for Bittorrent. Copyright holders are expected to acquire the IP addresses of infringers by connecting to a tracker. This means that when piracy deserts Bittorrent in favour of another method of distribution, the copyright lobbies will be back asking for broader powers to snoop online.
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
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: (Score:3, Informative)
The customer will want to ensure you don't turn around and sell the same code to their competitors at a knock-down price, after they've paid for its specification & development.
This can be enforced in the contract, if it's required. Most customers, however, want to spend as little as possible and so are very happy with code reuse. They don't pay for the things other people needed in the past, your next customer doesn't pay for stuff that was developed as part of this contract.
This is why they will insist you hand copyright over to them at the end of the project - they rely on that copyright to exploit the competitive value they've paid for in the software.
It is very rare to hand over the copyright to the customer. You will generally give them a permissive right to the code, but you retain the copyright.
Your argument would have weight if the norm was for the developer to retain the rights, but that is not the norm - you just didn't understand why until now.
It has been the norm for every contracting company that
Re: (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. I
Re: (Score:2)
Beyond stupid though.
so, what if china, indonesia, and other southeast asia countries ramp up prices of their consumer goods in response to this digital 'rights' enforcement crap the west is trying to push down the throat of entire world ?
these countries can increase prices of their goods a lot, and still can make it impossible for west to reengage in manufacturing due to low price range.
result will be increased cost of living, a lot of problems and unrest in the west.
and if west imposes tariffs and taxes,
Re: (Score:2)
calculating that the eastern countries have more than 3 billion of world's population, the ~1.5 billion market the west constitutes cant compete with that. western economies would slowly come crashing down.
How did the western economies get to where they currently are? Economies are not just measured by population.
Re: (Score:2)
they came there by huge manufacturing industries in between 1750-1950.
also, they were heavily exploiting the global markets in a one way fashion, through colonies, or priviledged deals or by just overpowering the fledgling markets through their output.
in some countries like turkey, they were even supporting governments that would create laws to curb railroad building for road building to create demand and sell ford cars exclusively through locally manufacturing plants.
end of colonialism, and recovery of the
Broadband tax (Score:3, Informative)
The broadband tax was scrapped though. This was a proposed tax of 50p on every household with a landline, intended to raise around £170m per year to fund the development of a super-fast broadband network.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8606639.stm [bbc.co.uk]
It ain't over yet? (Score:3, Informative)
The register say it has not done yet http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/08/mandybill_last_day/ [theregister.co.uk]
Brits - Contact your MP and then VOTE (Score:5, Informative)
See this list [theyworkforthebpi.com] for who voted and how.
To contact details for them go to WriteToThem [writetothem.com].
If they voted against, let them know that you appreciate it. My MP is Don Foster, who voted against. I've emailed him to thank him for doing so.
If your MP voted in favour, berate them for their obvious contempt for you, not just in passing this bill, but the manner of its passing.
If they didn't vote at all, ask them why they are such a spineless contemptible worm (in the nicest possible way) and ask them why you should vote for a person or party that has so much contempt for you that they couldn't be bothered to debate and vote on such a bill, and could allow it to be passed in this way. Point out that not voting in this case was tacit support for the bill and the manner in which it was passed.
Keep it clean and polite (nut-job rants will be ignored), but make it clear what you think of them and their kind.
As I pointed out to Don Foster, whatever the merits of this bill, the idea that it could be passed in this fashion just goes to show just how much contempt many politicians have for the electorate (as if we needed any more evidence).
And for christ sake, VOTE. I'm bored of people telling me they are not voting because "they are all the same". If you don't want to vote for one of the main parties, vote for an independent or a smaller party. If you don't vote at all then they don't care about you, it doesn't work as a protest.
"In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve" - Alexis de Tocqueville/Hunter S Thompson (and various others, take your pick).
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.
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.
Time to download I2P (Score:5, Informative)
Rather popular in France and Germany, and growing a lot in the USA and elsewhere:
I2P is a general-purpose network anonymizer [i2p2.de] with built in web, email and bittorrent. You can download other apps for it, too, like a chat messenger and a distributed filing system. There is also a version of eMule available for it called iMule.
I2P was made to host data services in-network, so it is something of a darknet. It shares some of the concept behind TOR, but outproxies are the exception and it is quicker (though not nearly as quick as direct Internet access). If you have some patience and can live with 25KBytes/sec then it should fit the bill for you and provide peace of mind.
Time to get an Always-On VPN Service (Score:2, Interesting)
My employer offers a home VPN service whereby I am always connected to our VPN and egress at various points around Europe. They don't particularly monitor this traffic and even provide on-net mirrors to most GNU/Linux distributions and run internal bittorrent trackers for legitimate internal filesharing.
I think I'm going to use that.
It's becoming quite sad when I'll trust my employer more than I will my ISP to keep me safe. Years gone by the idea of letting my connection filter through the corporation was h
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:can somebody explain (Score:5, Informative)
A "Three-strikes"-equivalent law for filesharers is still in (without trial), and the text of the bill can be ready to imply that it will be ISPs responsible for ensuring that their networks aren't used to infringe copyright - effectively mandating monitoring of all internet traffic at a much greater level than is currently done.
There is also a provision which allows the Secretary of State (with the approval of a court, to allow a tiny bit of balance) to require the blocking of any websites which are involved in the infringement of copyright. Or, indeed, may be used in infringement of copyright. When asked if this would include sites such as Wikileaks, ministers said yes, it would, as the material they leak is copyrighted by its original owners. They were quick to point out that they wouldn't use it to infringe on freedom of speech though.
Yep, I feel real safe with that reassurance.
Other aspects of the bill are actually reasonable, there's just a handful of provisions that are really quite shockingly draconian.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What happened to the exchange of information and knowledge
Dangerous and unnecessary, citizen! You can learn everything you need to know at a university or trade school, and get all your news from any one of the fine media outlets. Now have a nice day, maybe visit the mall. :)