UK ISPs Agree To Send Out Intimidation Notices For Claimed Infringement
from the educational-program dept
Despite no real evidence of effectiveness, various UK ISPs have now agreed to start sending out "educational" "alerts" to subscribers that copyright holders accuse of using their internet connection for unauthorized file sharing. This is a modification on the US "six strikes" system, in that these latest alerts are even more meaningless. Unlike the US's "voluntary" system, in which ISPs may take some limited punitive measures, the UK ISPs won't do that. They won't even tell users about the possibility of punitive measures. They'll basically just say "hey, someone spotted you doing something, and we think maybe you should knock it off."The deal has been struck with the BPI, which represents the British music industry, and the Motion Picture Association (MPA), which covers film.Of course, as the BBC article notes, the MPAA/BPI and others wanted much stricter measures, but were unable to get them. And that means this is nothing more than a foot in the door plan. It's easy to make a prediction: when copyright infringement doesn't magically stop, these groups will go running back to the ISPs (and to the UK government) whining about how more "needs to be done."
The bodies had originally suggested the letters should tell repeat infringers about possible punitive measures.
They also wanted access to a database of known illegal downloaders, opening the possibility of further legal action against individuals. Continue reading the main story
However, following almost four years of debate between the two sides, the final draft of the Voluntary Copyright Alert Programme (Vcap) contains neither of those key measures.
Within the leaked agreement, one important point: if this system does not have a big effect on piracy, then rights holders will call for the "rapid implementation" of the Digital Economy Act, and all the strict measures that come with it.I would question the "seriously credible set of data." Showing that asking nicely doesn't stop infringement doesn't mean that suddenly pulling out the big ban hammer will actually stop infringement. At this point there's plenty of "seriously credible data" that tougher laws don't stop infringement (or, at least, if they do short term, it doesn't last very long). But, you know, to the big copyright lobbyists, greater enforcement is the only hammer they know. Actually providing consumers with what they want is a concept that they don't spend any time exploring.
Steve Kuncewicz, an expert in online and internet law, agreed. He speculated that the deal "may be a Trojan horse exercise in gathering intelligence about how seriously downloaders take threats".
In other words, if it can be shown that asking nicely does not have a significant effect on curbing piracy, rights holders will for the first time have a seriously credible set of data with which to apply pressure for harder enforcement on those who simply do not want to pay for entertainment.
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I can't help but wonder...
And who gets to decide what goes into the "educational" letters; at least with the statutory scheme there was some oversight of both the content of the letters and the evidence-gathering process, now we have neither.
So for £75k a year the BPI gets to send propaganda to millions of people. Money which I imagine will come out of the artists' and writers' shares of sales. And ISP subscribers have to cover the other 25%. And the general public gets screwed for the millions already spent setting this up.
All on the back of no evidence.
And to top it all, this week we find out that - due to pressure from the UK music publishers (and friends), we won't be getting some of the key new copyright exceptions any time soon. They were supposed to happen at the beginning of next month, but now it may be October, if ever.
How did these people get so powerful?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These scum seem to have also forgotten
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They're the kinda people who would fight a fire by throwing gasoline on it, and after seeing that fail spectacularly, rather than trying something else like water, they'd instead claim that their failure means they just hadn't used enough gasoline.
And of course if anyone tried to help by suggesting some other, better way to fight the fire, they'd just call that person a 'fire-apologist' and keep right on dumping the gasoline into the blaze.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
One argument nullifies the other.
... of course, to admit that would require them and their pet politicians to be reasonable, and be willing to look at all the facts, not just the handful they use, so as logical as your point is, it's something they wouldn't even see as remotely relevant, since as I noted, to them, if their actions haven't worked, it just means they need to do the same stuff but more of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still, I'd guess that would be exactly how they want it, they don't want this plan to work, so that when it fails, they can go back to the government and get them to force the ISP's to implement all those extras they got slapped down on before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
From this BBC article on the subject:
"In the agreement, it states that an ineffective system would lead rights holders to call for "rapid implementation" of stronger measures as outlined in the Digital Economy Act."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How's about
letters sent to suspected infringers must be "educational" in tone, "promoting an increase in awareness" of legal downloading services.
Why not instead send a letter to the ..AA's that is "educational" in tone, "promoting an increase in awareness" of ways to make money without being affected negatively by piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How's about
'...letters sent to suspected infringers must be "educational" in tone, "promoting an increase in awareness" of legal downloading services.'
All of which suck. One of the main reasons so many people pirate is because those 'legal downloading services' either flat out don't exists in their area, or are absolutely terrible, offering barely a fraction of what people are looking for, often at high prices, and with a ton of restrictions on accessing the content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How's about
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How's about
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How's about
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Serious set of data
Based on untried accusations by copyright holders.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps they should just set up a counter that ticks up everytime they imagine infringement happened (because these systems are far from perfect) and start to understand that the download is costing them money... but not how they think. Money they could have earned is being lost because they refuse to participate in the market. That all of the time and money they keep using to repeat the failed experiments over and over could have built a real market that meets consumer demands.
Why is these industries allowed to avoid the harsh reality that they are dinosaurs? Why must others keep propping up a business model that would have collapsed or adapted years ago without the Gov meddling to keep the ancient system running.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pretty please
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Silver Lining
I look forward to seeing the Evil British Overlords of Musical and Media copyright being depicted waterboarding poor, average joes strapped into the deadly, comfy chair of doom and being interrogated by the BBC's infamous kamikaze bagpipers of Brigadoon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
on the other hand
Depends how the letters are written, which depends _who_ writes them I guess.
However it has a single *massive* plus point. It will make a lot more people realise that the internet is watched, tracked, everything they do is traced, with luck it will raise awareness of encryption and security more generally.
I do hope someone at GCHQ sends someone at the BPI, MPA, MPAA, R. Ass. America etc a nice bunch of flowers for highlighting the way the net is watched and encouraging encryption. You see just occasionally a government does something where the unintended consequence has a useful side.
Perhaps..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Notifying customers...
Somebody claims some customer violated somebodies copyright? Forward it to the customer in question.
If the customer really did, he'll probably take the infringing content down, or stop filesharing, if he didn't he can contact the accuser himself he tell him what he thinks.
Usually, there is absolutely no need to get law enforcement involved, unless one party insists stubbornly on something it should not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and by all means lets forget
[ link to this | view in chronology ]