UK Ministers 'Concede' Some Ridiculous Points in Digital Economy Bill In Attempt To Get Other Ridiculous Measures

from the it's-a-diversion dept

When Peter Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill was first announced, many people were so shocked by the provision that would let Mandelson or his successor change copyright law at will, with no Parliamentary approval, that they started focusing on that, rather than the expected problem with the bill, like the fact that it could allow people to be kicked offline without a conviction. There has been a lot of pushback from some politicians in the UK and various amendments proposed to fix the bill. And now it looks like the gov't has agreed to make some changes to the infamous Section 17 provision.

Of course, the concessions appear to be rather minor, and my more cynical view is that they knew they were going to do this all along. The idea is simple. Introduce one section that's even more ridiculous and outrageous than the sections you really want passed, and then let all the complaints and press coverage focus on that more ridiculous section. Then, after people get all worked up about it, "concede" just a little bit, and notice that most people no longer have the energy to fight about the other provisions.
Hide this

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: copyright, digital economy bill, peter mandelson, three strikes, uk


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2010 @ 12:32pm

    This is basically the same thing movie producers do when getting ratings. They slip in completely outrageous scenes so that the ratings board concentrate on those instead of the other outrageous content.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    william (profile), 13 Jan 2010 @ 12:56pm

    the sandwich method

    I agree with Mike.

    One thing I learned from Dogbert is that when presenting choices to management type, always present "the idea you want" and two "obviously bad idea".

    Like this
    -document the problem and solve it internally
    -send press release to all major news outlet, apologize to public and pay everyone for damages
    -destroy all humanity so no one finds out

    However, this WILL sometime backfire when they choose 3.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), 13 Jan 2010 @ 1:00pm

      Re: the sandwich method

      Lol... Acorn.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      GunSheep (profile), 13 Jan 2010 @ 2:17pm

      Re: the sandwich method

      Wait....number 3 isn't the correct choice?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Pickle Monger (profile), 15 Jan 2010 @ 7:55am

      Re: the sandwich method

      There's an old Soviet joke from the times of Perestroika:

      Stalin comes back to life, comes to Kremplin and proceeds to take control of the government. He assembles everyone and issues 2 orders:
      1. Hunt down end execute all the non-communists.
      2. Paint the Mausoleum colour green.
      Everyone asks:
      - Comrade Stalin, why green?
      - Excellent. I knew the first point would not be an issue.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    :), 13 Jan 2010 @ 2:25pm

    Sleight of hand

    You gotta give it to them. They are nothing but persistent and for this type of thing even clever at times :)

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Fentex, 13 Jan 2010 @ 3:19pm

    I work as a I.R contractor and currently spend most of my time working on business support web applications for a communications equipment manufacturer.

    The company is one of the more succesful and larger employers in my home town and native country.

    Yesterday while leaving work I was thinking about the companies founder (who started out making radios in the forties) who died recently.

    And wondering about how a person might go about building a company such as this in the modern world. I mused briefly about where one would get money from - and an idea crossed my mind.

    Investment in new or innovative industries is likely to become increasingly harder to obtain in a world strait-jacketed by absolutist I.P laws.

    It's an obvious implication of the I.P tax levied by protected monopolists that investment in productive business becomes harder to justify for fear of unknown expenses and possible outright denial of success by I.P hoarders.

    Which makes investment in the less productive routine and mundane such as property and banks bluer chip investment accounts more attractive.

    Which I have been developing an ill defined feeling of worry about: I suspect it would create financial incentives to leverage more than is reasonable out of those limited opportunities for profitable investment. That it is a positive pressure to create the incentives which have threatened the world with economic collapse recently.

    It makes me wonder if the threat of I.P monopolies is not more profound than many suspect - that the economic perversions it creates may grow to undermine a much greater part of economic activity than seems likely at first realisation of their destructive incentives.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 13 Jan 2010 @ 6:25pm

    Speaker: Then it is unanimous, we are going to approve the bill to evacuate the town of Springfield in the great state of-
    Congressman: Wait a second, I want to tack on a rider to that bill - $30 million of taxpayer money to support the perverted arts.
    Speaker: All in favor of the amended Springfield-slash-pervert bill?
    [entire congress boos]
    Speaker: Bill defeated!

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    M, 14 Jan 2010 @ 12:09am

    True

    Common psychological/negotiation trick: make a proposition so outrageous, all subsequent propositions doesn't seam to be so outrageous.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Doe, 14 Jan 2010 @ 4:17am

    No different in the US government

    This is exactly how the US government works. Just look at healthcare reform. Propose a complete shift to a single payer model. People focus on that, it gets removed, the rest gets passed.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2010 @ 8:37pm

    two steps forward, one step back. Two steps forward, one step back.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.