TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

UK Says ‘No’ To Disconnecting File-Sharers, Sort Of

One of the key clauses in the UK’s Digital Economy Bill is the suggestion that alleged persistent copyright infringers could be disconnected from the Internet. In a response to an online petition opposing the measure, the UK government has stated it will not terminate the accounts of infringers. But it has a wording trick up its sleeve.

In November 2009, details finally became public concerning the UK Digital Economy Bill, which aimed to turn elements of Lord Carter’s Digital Britain report into law.

Part of the proposals indicated that Internet users would face being monitored by the music and movie industries. Their ISPs would then be required to pass on copyright infringement notices based on evidence supplied by anti-piracy tracking companies.

If file-sharing wasn’t reduced by 70% in 2 years using these ‘educational’ measures, alleged persistent infringers faced the ultimate sanction of being disconnected from the Internet.

The proposals were met with massive opposition, with ISP TalkTalk going as far as threatening legal action over what it says amounts to a breach of human rights.

Adding to the pressure, a petition against the proposals was launched on the Number 10 website demanding;

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to abandon Lord Mandelson’s plans to ban individuals from the internet based on their use of ‘peer to peer’ file sharing.”

The Government has now responded, and for TalkTalk and the countless others who share their views, on the surface it seems like good news, but a closer look reveals a somewhat disappointing result.

In its response the Government says that it wants as many citizens as possible to enjoy the benefits of the Internet and recognizes that technology has changed the way people access media content, in some cases “faster than products and services commercially on offer have developed” – an apparent reference to the superior accessibility of unauthorized downloads.

The Government goes on to say that they take the interests of artists and creators very seriously and have been working hard to find solutions to online copyright infringement. Nevertheless, they will not require ISPs to monitor their users to detect infringements and downloaders will be pretty safe, as is the case now, with detection being focused on those who upload material without permission.

On potential disconnections for persistent file-sharers – the key issue for many – the Government goes on to say:

“We will not terminate the accounts of infringers – it is very hard to see how this could be deemed proportionate except in the most extreme – and therefore probably criminal – cases.”

What categorizes an infringement as ‘criminal’ is open to interpretation, but is likely to mean very large-scale infringement, infringement for profit, or both. So good news then? Well, not quite.

Despite throwing out absolute permanent disconnections as a measure against file-sharers, the Government is still considering other ‘technical’ solutions if the ISP warnings aren’t effective including “band width restriction, a daily downloading limit or, as a last resort, temporary account suspension.”

So we’re back to disconnections again. In terms of time, ‘temporary’ is not defined. Of course, anything less than ‘permanent’ fits the wording. A day? A month? A year?

Another part of the response which has been mentioned several times before and still remains puzzling is this section:

“In the cases of the most serious infringers, if a rights holder obtains a court order, the ISP would have to provide information so that the rights holder can take targeted court action.”

As anyone who has followed the activities of Davenport Lyons and ACS:Law will tell you, the personal details of anyone alleged to have shared a single file can easily be obtained by rightsholders.

Sadly, despite the headline-grabbing statements, it seems that little has changed with this response from the Government.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • http://www.eZee.se www.eZee.se

    Same old same old, move along now, nothing to see here…
    no bribes or anything underhanded has taken place.. move along.

  • Tom

    Interesting, they actually still listen to the people.

  • Lame

    Why the hell cant we have a world free of these lame people, where we can share and the industry getting rich, without anyones right’s being breached? America is a choke hold, with this new Ip Task Force. Will it do worse then RIAA? Sue millions? Jail them? Fuck that. PIRATES ALWAY’S WIN. Just adapt to the changing business model bitches.

  • Bryan

    Hmmmmmmmmm
    Yeah, i guess that’s good…

  • duane

    They haven’t changed their position at all. They just phrased it in a different way. Here’s a response from the Open Rights Group if you want to link it in the article:

    http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2010/has-the-government-changed-its-position-on-disconnection-no

  • anon2

    seems to be a typical government response. say, in a round about way, what the general public want to hear, whilst still leaving the original threats/clauses in and unchanged. the government is still going to do what it wants and what it said in the first place. it only sounds on the surface as if the brits are going to be a bit safer from disconnection. ie, no notice has been taken of the public or the house of lords recommendations at all!!

  • Reasoned Mind

    Unlawful behavior in your car can cause you to lose your privilege to drive. Unlawful behavior in your home can cause you to forfeit your freedom to remain in that home. Unlawful behavior in public can take you off the street for a night in jail. Unlawful behavior on the internet can cause you to lose your privilege of network access.

    See a pattern?
    Yes.
    Because it’s fair, always was and will be on the internet, too. Government will never cave and relinquish their authority to punish and discourage unlawful behavior and they shouldn’t. That’s one reason why we created government in the first place.

  • anon2

    read the article from link in post #4. not only is the length of time of ‘suspension’ not stated, it is also not stated who decides when the suspension will end and what conditions will be imposed to get the suspension lifted. can see all sorts of problems happening here, including bankruptcy. too many companies rely solely on the internet to pass on and receive information. mistakes are made and not able to be corrected as no written information is sent to ‘victims’ until it is far too late! once this can of worms has been opened, it is gonna be extremely difficult to close again!

  • Anonymous

    This sounds familiar to what happened in New Zealand last year

  • Rob

    Biquad antenna, aircrack suit, cheap laptop = “I am invincible” (quote from nerd in Goldeneye)

  • Anonymous

    Muhahhahahhhaaaaaa
    How long is a piece of string

    After three infringements = 1 month bandwidth restriction to 256kb/sec up 32kb/sec

    After four infringements = 3 month bandwidth restriction to 256kb/sec up 32kb/sec

    After six infringements = 6 month bandwidth restriction to down 56kb/sec up 32Kb/sec

    After 10 infringements = 1 month temp suspension. Seems about fair.

    Stepped return to full speed, unless you infringe again and then your banned. You’ve had fair warning.
    Stops all this Human Rights b/s. Funny how rights only ever applies to your side of the argument eh?

  • It’s Not me, It’s YOU

    Muhahhahahhhaaaaaa
    How long is a piece of string

    After three infringements = 1 month bandwidth restriction to 256kb/sec up 32kb/sec

    After four infringements = 3 month bandwidth restriction to 256kb/sec up 32kb/sec

    After six infringements = 6 month bandwidth restriction to down 56kb/sec up 32Kb/sec

    After 10 infringements = 1 month temp suspension. Seems about fair.

    Stepped return to full speed, unless you infringe again and then your banned. You’ve had fair warning.
    Stops all this Human Rights b/s. Funny how rights only ever applies to your side of the argument eh?

  • Anonymous

    stupid bully don’t worry mr brown will be gone soon.

    he can final go down the toilet with the other brownies. throw some bleach down too these buggers are extra nasty.

    like we have found out its GREED thats ruining the arts.

    i can no longer play my own music with my ibanez pgm with my jmc 800 stack thanks to these copyright extremist why should i pay these buggers to play my OWN music.

    that my not be directly related but a example of how these suck bags have taken away my pride and joy.

    trust me guys luckly i don’t rely on my music creativity to earn money i am a computer scientist.

    seems to me labor would be all over this idea to cut the internet off its people another law were they don’t have to justify their actions, you know like the terrorist laws they use to stop and search 5 year olds, or spy on what you put in the bin.

    this a law labour wants shame that the majority of the uk public think shearing is no crime at all not as though file shearing was against the law anyway, well that’s only if ask fascist fact or bpi.

    i hope the haters become the loathed and look backed in shame from the future generations much like the slave own families who still today are not ashamed of were their family money came from.

    a little rant i guess still nice to know i am not alone on this one.

    cheers guys

  • deviant

    If you’re downloading all your data through FTPS how the hell are the ISP gonna be able to suspend you ;)

  • Samalia Pirate

    I will continue to download and upload. Screw mafiaa and the nwo. They can all go to he11.

  • Trelew

    Typical government BS, pander to corporate interests while completely BSing the public about the matter. Did anyone really think that ANY government in the world is going to go against the corruption of corporate greed?

  • Yo

    Fortunately it’s nothing that a few basic technical tricks can’t take care of!

  • quoting #1

    We the crooked monopolies (mpaa riaa et al) do not bribe people. We just help them with their election expenses!

  • kobayashi_maru

    “…downloaders will be pretty safe, as is the case now, with detection being focused on those who upload material without permission.”

    Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this another sleight-of-speak for ‘everyone who file shares’?

  • SEEDplease

    ….Whatever!….
    In the mean time let’s just go back to
    Leeching, leeching, leeching…
    And Seeding, seeding, seeding….

  • Jigsy

    I can just see “temporary” suspension meaning a decade or something.

  • PT

    *yawns emphatically

  • dtl

    lol what ever, still using my VPN/seedbox anyway :P

  • Merrick

    @Reasoned Mind

    What you have to realise is the element of collective punishment here. I need the internet for my work and no IP monitoring company on planet earth is capable of identifying an infringer behind an IP address. The actions of others will result in internet disconnections for many.

    Reason that out if you have 2 minutes

  • p_c

    What seems to be missed by the liked of Reasoned Mind is due legal process. If you drive your car dangerously, you get stopped. Fair enough.

    But what is being proposed her is like the police coming to your door and saying:

    “Your number plate has been reported twice near the scene of an alleged crime. We don’t know if it was on your car, or who was driving it, and have not established in court that a crime actually took place. But if it is reported again we are impounding your car.

    You see, it should come down to due process and the presumption of innocence.

  • duane

    TorrentFreak, you claim you will not tolerate trolls, yet I see more trolls in the comments than I see people. EITHER DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT OR REMOVE THE NOTICE. Thanks.

  • TerribleTony

    “band width restriction, a daily downloading limit or, as a last resort, temporary account suspension.”

    But the ISPs already do the first two.

  • TerribleTony

    @24 You are a demanding little bunny aren’t you?

  • duane

    @26
    No, just an annoyed one.

  • kabuki0009

    Not sure about this, I’m of a mind to wait and see.

  • duane
  • Pingback: PR, Public Relations & communications news and features

  • DeltaPan

    @24.

    So we are supposed to be fine with idiots who obviously have no idea what they are talking about regards point of law when they refer to torrent downloaders as “Criminals”?

    Just spout off as though we are criminals as they egotistically condescend to us all as though they are something superior.

    We’re supposed to fine with it and say nothing are we?

    no, idiots who just come onto TF to feed their ego’s by slagging us off with false accusations that we are criminals, deserve everything they get.

    End of.

  • DeltaPan

    Sorry, i was thinking of another thread, got both pages open, criminal isn’t mentioned in this thread.

    But those who come to TF, which is torrent community, filesharing oriented, to slag people off like they are better than us, should expect robust opposition to our points of view.

    As in this thread there isn’t really any trolling, you are referring to the other i’d of thought, else who in this is really trolling.

  • duane

    DeltaPan, I was pissed off at @11 who had the audacity to say

    “Stops all this Human Rights b/s.”

    That counts as the worst kind of troll in my book, and there should be SOME way to block it if TF won’t do it for us. If only we had some down-voting system like YouTube, that we can use to hide the most inane comments.

  • Anonymous

    Except that law doesn’t apply to the Internet which transcends boundaries of countries and therefore, their respective laws.

  • DeltaPan

    @32
    Fair enough duane matey.

    Peace. :)

  • Jim

    None of these solutions will work with encrypted traffic..

    You cant have a download limit with encrypted traffic, since a lot of people use VPNs for work related tasks, imposing a limit on that would make your connection useless and would severely reduce ISP business.

    If this is the best they can do after all this time.. I have no worries that we will be downloading for a long time to come.

  • Bad_Mojo

    @rm
    “Unlawful behavior on the internet can cause you to lose your privilege of network access.

    See a pattern?”

    Yes, your sanctimonious bullshit.
    who made you the internet God?

  • Put on your yamaka

    I agree with Reasoned Mind. If people start getting banned from the internet they’ll learn why they should hate Hollywood. Their movies should be burned in the streets, not viewed.

  • DeltaPan

    @36

    Indeed matey.

    if only as much efforts as being targeted against those filesharing were afforded to scammers and phishers, identity thieves, credit fraudsters etc on the Internet.

    Real Internet crime, “Unlawful behavior on the internet” might actually fall instead of forever rising.

    As it is, loads of effort is being levelled at filesharing, which translates to minimal loses to the industries involved who still realise massive profits even during the recession they hardly took a hit, while individuals are having their lives wrecked because of prolific cyber crime against the individual, as much as the corporates are demanding measures which will also wreck lives disproportionately to downloading habits.

    Easier to allow entertainments corporate enforcement agents to sue the hell out of a single mother and her daughter who downloads some music for instance and causing them severe hardship and adversity, for example from a couple of years back in the USA, than actually doing anything about cyber criminals in real terms.

    Peace. :)

  • DeltaPan

    Sorry. Re my 40, is regards to 38 -Bad_Mojo comment

  • suez

    This is like stopping water from being supplied to a house, because someone was caught drunk in public.

  • The Bats

    @42 “This is like stopping water from being supplied to a house, because someone was caught drunk in public.”

    What kind of water are they drinking in your city?

  • sum1

    @43

    It is actually possible to get drunk from water, you’d need a very large amount though, you’d probably drown before becoming drunk.

    Personally i believe if a techonology exists that can re-create a product (whatever that be) free of charge, then noone should be stopped from using it.

    Assumption that your product (whatever) can always make profit or has any right to, is a dilusion.

    If i eat an apple, plant the seed and grow an apple tree, should the supermarket be able to sue me for creating my own supply of apples (instead of continuing to buy theirs)?… think about it…

  • hms-one

    please stop talking about aircrack in forums like this one.

  • Anonymous

    Cant they just focus on combating child pornography

  • Anti-ness

    seriously there are defintely some MPAA, RIAA employees skulking around TorrentFreak comment boxs these days

    everyone chill be careful to chill and not rise to the flame-bait

  • CapnS

    @24
    You do realize that if you’re using your work equipment for a crime then you have nothing to fight with right? I mean seriously we all here are little vigalanties who ‘take the law into our own hands’ but as I’ve stated before: It is not up to us to decide what laws are to be obeyed and disobeyed, if we want change, lobby for it.

    If you were continuously caught speeding in a vehicle you used for work it’d be taken away from you too.

    What RM states is very reasonable and something I *WOULD* support. As stated in the article the definition of what was defined as criminal would need to be specified but if you knowingly break laws you should be prepared for what is coming to you

  • duane

    “lobby for it” — lobbying is for corporations. Us little people don’t have that privilege.

    I hope I’m around when all you *IAA skunks get the boot. And you will.

  • Barry

    Great, i signed that petition.

    I don’t really care though, they’ll never catch me.

  • Quartz

    The petition forming the basis of this article is one of two.
    Here is the other more substantive and larger e-petition

    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/

    Feel free to sign it if you want to ensure the government are reminded just who pays their wages.

    “We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to abolish the proposed law that will see alleged illegal filesharers disconnected from their broadband connections, without a fair trial.

    Submitted by Andrew Heaney of TalkTalk – Deadline to sign up by: 20 October 2010 – Signatures: 33,332

  • Pingback: renaissance chambara | Ged Carroll - Links of the day

  • DeltaPan

    Signed, was 33,366 signee.

    Peace. :)

  • Spineless

    Sounds like the Lisbon treaty all over again..

  • hmmmm

    sounds like a bit of a problem,but nothing really alarming…;)
    we’ll keep doing what we do best:sharing!
    whilst they will be doing what they do best: try to find a solution to stop us…he he he!

    peace.

  • abolish copyright now

    copyright law will continue to harm society until society ends copyright law.

  • twozz

    well if this is the summery of what’s to come – it amounts to no change at all. It seems they are leaving regulation down to individual prosecutions.
    The only major change is the 3rd party monitoring system along with three strikes but oddly is ambiguous about what would happen after the third strike.
    However it is a system of sorts and one that could tighten up if it felt it had to……

  • Anon

    you lot moan an awful lot, don’t you? I don’t see the problem with trying to protect the rights of people who are actually out there creating something worth while.

    You all need to grow up and start realising that people should – and will – get rewarded for what they do.

    There’s plenty of ways to enjoy music for minimal cost if you can’t afford to buy it in CD form now.

    If you continue breaking the law, you will get punished.

    Quite simply, you’ve been given a marvelous tool, you’ve abused it and you feel so clever ripping off the arts (which you justify with all sorts of silly reasons), and now the adults need to come by, grab you by the scruff of the neck, and force you to play fair.

    Seems fair enough to me. If you continue (and there will always be some bad eggs, I know that) you will be punished.

    for example – “copyright law will continue to harm society until society ends copyright”

    See what I mean? It’s not thought out, mature or realistic.

  • Pingback: Pirate Party Radio Episode 017: February 25, 2010 - Rpking1986 Random Blog Postings

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.