UK Digital Economy Bill Concession Is To Allow In A Smidgen Of Due Process, After You've Been Declared Guilty

from the guilty-until-appealed-innocent dept

Tue, Mar 23rd 2010 8:38pm — Mike Masnick

As the debate continues in the UK over the Digital Economy Bill, Stephen Timms, the minister for Digital Britain, is trying to appease critics of the bill, by promising to include an appeals process for those who are accused of copyright infringement and threatened with having their internet access removed. This is mind-boggling for a few reasons. First, the admission shows that such an appeals process hadn't been in the plan already. More importantly, it shows the general thinking: this is a guilty-until-proven-innocent process. You get accused and you're guilty until you "appeal" and can prove that you were falsely accused. That doesn't seem like reasonable due process. That seems like stacking the deck in favor of copyright holders against the public.

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: appeals, copyright, digital economy bill, due process, stephen timms, uk

24 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 8:57pm

Innocent until proven guilty was such a quaint concept but here in the 21st century everybody is guilty of something.

I can hardly wait for the encryption of information to be made illegal.

"Is that guy wearing a mask in public! Arrest him! Or her! I cannot tell! They're obviously trying to hide their resounding guilt! Why are you wearing a mask?"

Because it's freezing out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nelsoncruz (profile), 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:07pm

Proving a negative
Not only that... but in an appeal, how the hell does one "prove" they are not guilty? How does one prove a negative?

This whole thing is like if people started to report license plates of cars we see busting speed limits, etc, and the police fined the owners... unless they appeal and prove to be innocent. It's absolutely mind boggling!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin Marks, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:08pm

The DE Bill compares badly to Magna Carta
http://epeus.blogspot.com/2009/10/baron-mandelson-and-magna-carta.html

Indeed, it looks like the BPI took Bono's advice on being like China when drafting the clauses they wanted:

http://bit.ly/ChinaBPI
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:14pm

either way, im glad im not a british citizen, tho i fear how long it will be until this idiocy makes it way across the pond(into law that is)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:18pm

the us legal system is also a guilty until proven innocent system too then by your standards. if i dont appeal being charged i will be found guilty even if i am not. your logic is lacking on this one mr masnick
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:25pm

Re:
You're wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Beverly Crandon, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:30pm

Yeah... It seems as though the UK government hasn't thought this through. The amount of energy they will have to exude to manage this pre and post appeal will be daunting for them
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:37pm

Re:
False. Your intelligence is lacking on...every single comment you've posted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:55pm

Heard of Gitmo?
Here they just call you a terrorist and throw you in Gitmo, well that is until they move them all into the states. Course this is also assuming you don't have comcast, in which case they will tell you that the fair limit for your ip has been used. Then ban you for a year :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 9:55pm

Re:
Except of course that they can't punish you until after you are found guilty. It's not verdict first trial after. Unless of course you have come from down the rabbit hole.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Mar 2010 @ 10:12pm

This is just a "two steps forward, one step back" scam. They will likely get huge backlashes and then agree to repeal some of the most absurd laws in an attempt to get more absurd laws on the books.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sinsi (profile), 23 Mar 2010 @ 10:26pm

Sounds like the DCMA takedown process and the default judgement process. You don't appeal, you lose. Thanks USA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 23 Mar 2010 @ 10:55pm

I'm sure they'll probably put the appeals form in a nice easy online form... that you won't be able to access because you've been kicked off the internet. I wonder what the penalties for letting someone kicked off the internet for filesharing use your internet will be?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mike allen (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 12:07am

i was talking
to our MP yesterday and put this to him If there was a murder here would you sanction the whole family or street being arrested and sentenced without trial he didnt reply!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Davem (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 12:52am

Been here before
This 'appeal' process has been discussed here a couple of months back:
"Insult To Injury: Mandelson Wants Those Wrongly Kicked Off The Internet To Pay To Appeal
from the guilty-by-association dept
As if Peter Mandelson's Digital Economy Bill proposal wasn't bad enough, Dave sends in yet another problem with it. While it does include a process for appealing if you are cut off for accusations (not convictions) of unauthorized file distribution or reproduction, you will have to pay up to appeal. So even if you are innocent, it will cost you money to make your case for why you shouldn't have been cut off in the first place."
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100127/0527467922.shtml

So, you can appeal, but unless the plans have changed, you'll have to pay for the privilege.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Haywood (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 3:08am

Re: Re:
Depends on your definition of punish. I had a friend falsely accused of malicious mischief on the slimmest of evidence, he turned himself in rather than be arrested & was held for a bond hearing. That resulted in him requiring a $300 bail, which couldn't be paid where he was held, and required a trip to the county seat, then a return trip to the jail with a paper to release. Then a court appearance to get the whole thing straightened out. The final outcome was a complete exoneration with records expunged, but I would consider that life interruption, a punishment. fortunately he had friends who were willing to blow off a day to get him out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Mar 2010 @ 4:30am

Re: Re:
just being charged is often punishment. arrested, handcuffed, maybe perp walked into the station, try to make bail, get stuck in jail for 24 hours while the bond comes through, and so on. oh yeah dont forget to declare your pending criminal trial if you try to get a new job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 24 Mar 2010 @ 4:51am

Re: Proving a negative
Even GPS data is insufficient to prove your innocence
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 24 Mar 2010 @ 4:54am

Re: Been here before
After this three strikes income is added to the budget, there will be quotas to meet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dwind (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 5:02am

they need 50mb per second bw to the house if they are unable to download anything?
It was announced at the same time a $9 levy would be assessed to pay for the upgrade.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 7:34am

Re:
"either way, im glad im not a british citizen, "

Just you wait until ACTA is signed ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Danny, 24 Mar 2010 @ 1:23pm

Re: Been here before
And that is the key. By putting it all on you the internet user your ability to get back in the net and more importantly clear your name will be proportional to how much money you can spare. This will probably result in a lot of people getting kicked off by default due to simply not having the money to fund their own appeal. But of course when it comes time for supporters of this nonsense to celebrate they are only going to count that they kicked "so many illegal downloader" off the net.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jake, 24 Mar 2010 @ 2:21pm

I'm accessing this site on a pre-pay 3G modem. My provider does not know my name or my address, I signed no contract, and I bought the modem and every bandwidth top-up with cash.

Catch me if you can, Mandy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DanVan (profile), 24 Mar 2010 @ 6:39pm

What a total disaster

Grandmothers will be brought for little to no crimes, children will also be brought forward, etc....
[ link to this | view in thread ]