Will Three Strikes Ever Really Get Implemented In The UK?

from the might-be-a-long-shot dept

Fri, Oct 30th 2009 9:31am — Mike Masnick

With Peter Mandelson announcing this week (as everyone expected) that he's going to introduce a proposal to kick file sharers off the internet under a "three strikes" plan, it's been amusing watching defenders of this idea try and fail to answer the question "how will this make people buy more stuff." Over and over again people explain to us why it'll decrease file sharing (something I actually doubt for a variety of reasons that I'll explore later), but no one has explained how it will make more people buy stuff.

But, perhaps an even bigger question is whether or not it will ever actually get implemented in the UK. TalkTalk, the ISP that has been fighting the proposal for a while (and even gave a nice demonstration to show why IP addresses are not accurate in figuring out who's responsible for online activity) is now saying that it will take legal action to block such a proposal from being put in place, saying that it's a violation of human rights to kick people offline based on accusations, rather than due process.

On top of that, the idea is already incredibly unpopular with the majority of people in the UK... and (most importantly) there's an election coming up soon in the UK. Backing a massively disliked proposal to kick people off the internet based on accusations using weak evidence... probably isn't a savvy political move at this moment. Given all of that, I'm wondering if the plan ever really moves forward in the UK, or if it just makes a lot of noise so that Mandelson and his colleagues can tell the entertainment industry how they tried, to make sure the political donations keep coming in.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: peter mandelson, three strikes, uk

24 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Derek Reed (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 9:43am

Skeptical
I'm skeptical of how unpopular this really is. I know I think it's insane, and others that I pay attention too think it is, but the layman is blissfully unaware as usual, perhaps?

"Oh, he supported that 'Help Music/The Arts' bill, good for him, I'll vote for him." - Average Stupid Twat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Infamous Joe (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 9:54am
  
  Re: Skeptical
  Those (usually blue) words that say "incredibly unpopular" link to the data you doubt.
  
  FYI
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Derek Reed (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 10:18am
    
    Re: Re: Skeptical
    That's kind of the point I'm trying to make, is the "Open Rights Group" average joe mainstream? Or are they a niche group that's heavily slanted against this sort of thing already?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 10:02am
  
  Re: Skeptical
  It is really unpopular amongst those who care about it (look at the comment pages on BBC/ Daily Mail/ Daily Telegraph if you don't believe me). Those that don't care about it.... don't care about it.
  
  The question is how many people care about it enough to change their vote!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 30 Oct 2009 @ 9:59am

I think it is crazy
I don't like the law and I don't pirate anything. To start handing over our individual rights to corporations is ludicrous. It is bad enough that governments are taking them away at ever increasing rates, but to let corporations get in on the act is crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RD, 30 Oct 2009 @ 10:02am

Wrong question really
While I agree with the "how will this make people buy more stuff", that is the wrong question. Or rather, the answer to that question is: it wont and kicking people off was never intended to. It's about fear, and ultimately, control. They are taking a scorched-earth approach to file sharing in the hopes that, through intimidation and generating paranoia, they hope to curtail file sharing activities. This, in their minds, will mean that the ONLY option people will then have is to purchase things. Of course, they completely ignore (as in, head-in-the-sand, fingers-in-ears la-la-la ignore) the fact that people will just then do without. Downloads are not lost sales. There is no NEED, this isnt food or gas. And the more barriers you put up between people and what they want, the more they will either do without or find alternatives that arent YOU. If you arent providing the material and experience they want, they will go ELSEWHERE. They seriously need a wake-up call about how people work, how the internet works, and how the modern world now works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brendan (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 10:54am
  
  Re: Wrong question really
  Sums it up quite nicely. It's a scare tactic that won't work.
  
  People will simply:
  - pirate anyway, using encryption and private systems
  - listen to less music (would the industry consider this a success? seems a bit backwards...)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 10:37am

Well, clearly the solution is that the music industry will have to bribe the majority of voters.

Err...take them out to dinner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jake, 30 Oct 2009 @ 11:27am

Honestly, the government that can completely disregard two million people turning out to protest against committing to the invasion of Iraq won't have much trouble shrugging off the EFF and Open Rights Group.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 12:07pm

Mike, why do you hate artists? They're only trying to help. Why can't you see that? They have my vote!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SteveD (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 12:17pm

There's an election coming up soon...
...an election no one expects the current Government to win, regardless of what they do.

Now would be the time to make unpopular decisions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MonicaS (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 12:30pm

Give up already
Seriously when are these people gonna get it?! We've been file sharing since, as far as I know, 1998, but probably quite a bit earlier then that. And it hasn't stopped or even slowed down. Quite the opposite, file sharing simply exploded. In the end, I don't think file sharing hurts the people we care most about, and that is the artists. As far as I know, most musicians make the bulk of their money from concerts and quite a bit less from music sales. So it not such a bad thing, so long as the pirated music leads to people wanting to see concerts. Monica S Los Angeles Computer Repair http://www.sebecomputercare.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 12:31pm

The incredible thought process of Mandelson
All this hoopla surrounding Peter Mandelson has persuaded me to be more cognizant of UK products and imports.

I definitely will be more careful to cut back on purchases of products made in the UK, which includes TV Programs, and when I see someone making a purchase of something I know originates from the UK, I will be sure to share the story of Peter Mandelson.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jake, 30 Oct 2009 @ 2:44pm
  
  Re: The incredible thought process of Mandelson
  I'd just like to point out that Lord Mandelson did not get his current job as a result of winning a seat in Parliament. We took the hint about him the second time he was forced to resign from government office for accepting bribes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 12:50pm

"saying that it's a violation of human rights to kick people offline based on accusations, rather than due process. "

Here's the rub: if the police don't want to treat it as a crime, it is exceedingly difficult to get something going through that side of the legal system, which would bring "due process". Copyright violations on the other hand operate from another set of rules, which can require very quick action that has little to do with due process.

In fact, due process in real world time would be something like a lifetime permission slip for internet users, it would take so long to process (years) that by then, they are possibly no longer offending in that manner.

The process to take action against copyright violators needs to be on a speed level with the speed of the violations. Real world speed here is way too slow to handle the reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Fenderson (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 1:19pm

"The process to take action against copyright violators needs to be on a speed level with the speed of the violations."

Screw human rights, ethics, good business sense, or justice. We can't afford those things when we've got COPYRIGHT VIOLATORS to catch!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 2:12pm
  
  Re:
  Sorry bub, but it isn't a human rights issue (the internet isn't a right, grow up).
  
  The concept is simple: Stop the crime from happening while the courts take their leisurely time figuring it out. If you don't, then it can takes years to turn off a copyright violator, effectively allowing them to continue to violate without restriction.
  
  You could say "screw copyright, screw their business, screw respect, screw the laws of the land, we got MUSIC TO SHARE!".
  
  Don't be foolish.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2009 @ 3:48pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Except that...it's a civil dispute between a private business and a private citizen, not a crime.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 4:07pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Stop the crime from happening while the courts take their leisurely time figuring it out.
    
    And I hope you're ready to pay compensation when you inevitably get it wrong.
    
    Be realistic.
    
    Technically you cannot stop people from violating your precious copyrights. You can waste a lot of resources victimising some "guilty" and a few innocents.
    
    Given the reality of effectively infinite music storage the internet is no longer necessary for filesharing. 10-12 years ago in the early Napster days my hard drive could hold around 2% of my CD collection. Now it could hold 20x my CD collection even uncompressed! A few more years and it will hold all the music ever recorded. Technically it's no longer necessary to be discriminating about what you keep.
    
    You should remember that copyright is not a right. It's a deal with the public. If the public wants to change the deal then they can. Ultimately they call the shots.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 6:57pm
    
    Re: Re:
    "Sorry bub, but it isn't a human rights issue"
    
    Ah, but it is, and it has little to do with the internet. It has to do with sue process.
    
    You see, at leat in the US, we have this notion that it's better to let guilty people go free than to punish the innocent. Without due process, the innocent are much more likely to be punished.
    
    That's a human rights issue.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike allen (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 2:14pm

Right
SteveD is right an election due in May and no one expects the government to win not even the government. so now is the time to bring in such things like this or ID cards and anything hated by the public.
Joe public may be unaware in general i only know of it being on the BBC technology section of their site the announcement was not on the evening news on TV nor any national radio news. a few local stations picked up on it including ours. (as you know mike)and a few broadsheet news papers i cant say about the sun or others as i dont read comics.
the above is from memory so please feel free to correct me if i missed something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike allen (profile), 30 Oct 2009 @ 2:22pm

any Brits in Lancashire
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
United.Hackers.Association, 30 Oct 2009 @ 4:22pm

WHY YOU ALL SHOULD CARE
i personally will make sure that any country that does this hackers inside and out get the appropriate exploits to make sure all the net in yoru countries is then effectively shut down

HOW YOU going to stop that kind a shit from happening.
Once you are accused ( from ip spoofing to mac address spoofing for wireless ) you are done.

ENJOY NO INTERNET
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Los Angeles Computer Repair, 4 Nov 2009 @ 5:07am

Los Angeles Computer Support - Hire a Geek Provides Top Quality Computer Support Service in the Los Angeles area.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]