UK faces file-sharing crackdown
Summary
Topics
The issue of copyrighted material being shared online is already the subject of an official, post-Digital Britain consultation, which is due to close on September 15. However, Stephen Timms — the successor to Digital Britain author Lord Carter — told the Financial Times on Friday that the issue was a "live area" and proposals to tackle copyright violations should perhaps be brought forward.
Digital Britain recommended a year-long trial period where ISPs send letters to suspected file-sharers. At the end of that year, if fewer than 70 percent of the recipients stopped sharing copyrighted material, the report suggested the imposition of technical measures to restrict bandwidth or block certain protocols. It is that year-long period that could now be shortened.
"The measures in the Digital Britain report may evolve slightly," a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) told ZDNet UK on Monday. "What we've heard from people [during the initial stages of the consultation period] was a lot of criticism that those tech measures wouldn't be introduced for a number of years, until 2012."
BIS's spokesperson denied reports that Mandelson had decided to become more involved in the issue after dining with music mogul David Geffen in Corfu last week.
"[Mandelson] has been very close to [Digital Britain] the whole time," the spokesperson said. "Carter was brought in to do the job, but, at the implementation stage, it's only natural that Lord Mandelson will take more of an interest."
This article was originally posted on ZDNet UK.
Talkback Most Recent of 5 Talkback(s)
-
Thieves that steal copyrighted...
material have ruined P2P for legitimate users. Fines are obviously not enough and perhaps it is time to move to jail time. I'm not even sure warnings are appropriate anymore. everyone has been warned enough. Downloading copyrighted material is stealing and jail time is what most thieves get, not fines.
bjbrock17th Aug 2009 -
RE: UK faces file-sharing crackdown
i wholeheartedly disagree with your heartless opinion. you want to send somebody to jail for downloading? what kind of crack are you smoking?! these institutions like the riaa need to fail and go away. their business model doesn't work, people aren't buying their crap cuz the material sucks. people who download media wouldn't buy it even if it wasn't available for download... many people who do download will in fact buy the material afterward if it's worth the money... and to have people like you advocating for jail time?! the fines are bad enough and now you want to further remove our rights? screw your pro-corporatism and go take a hike. you might as well be an riaa spokesman.
damasterwc17th Aug 2009 -
RE: UK faces file-sharing crackdown
this people can go for any extent to maximize there profit.i don't think anybody can buy all the songs or movie DVD he wants.and certainly artist get their pie-they all r filthy rich--they shouldn't be complaining that they don't have their own personal jet.
ZDnet Reader 4318th Aug 2009 -
it's not stealing then?
So it's ok to aquire something by just taking it when it's owner(s) are trying to sell it?
So when I'm walking down the street and I pass by a fruit stand outside the store that has peaches for 50 cents a piece, it's ok to just take some because nobody's watching? Because I can?
I agree that the entertainment industry is filthy and rich but that doesn't mean it's ok to just take things simply because you can. As the old saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.
You think that by stealing you're going to somehow change the way businesses act? I highly doubt it. All you'll do is raise the price for everybody else and kill the motivation for people to create.
hadoz20th Aug 2009 -
RE: UK faces file-sharing crackdown
While I don't claim that illegal copying is fair,
there is a distinction between the theft of a physical
object and the illegal copying of a copyrighted
object. The former costs the vendor directly, as they
paid wholesale for the goods (eg the peach). But in
the case of the digital medium there is not a direct
cost to the copyright holder. The financial impact on
the copyright holder is due to lost sales, which is
difficult to pin down precisely. If someone who would
not buy a digital object illegally copies it, the
copyright holder is not worse off for the copying. If
someone who would otherwise buy a digital object
illegally copies it instead, the copyright holder
loses out. Also if someone does not buy a particular
digital object as a result of illegally copying other
object the copyright owner of the first object has
lost money, but may have no legal objection if the
objects copied were not theirs. Similarly, a copyright
holder loses money if someone chooses to use
alternative free objects (in some cases free software
has impacted the sales of other sold software, for
example). So the causes and effects are very complex,
and it is wrong to simplify them too much.
Elroch15th Oct 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
