Opponents of the government’s Digital Economy Bill are calling for the proposed legislation to be thoroughly debated in Parliament, rather than being rushed through ahead of the election.
The Bill is due to receive its second reading in the House of Commons at around 3.30pm on Tuesday with further debates on the Bill expected on Wednesday and Thursday this week. The debates mean the bill will progress in the so-called “wash-up” process, where legislation is pushed through quickly before the election, which has been set for 6 May.
However opponents of the legislation – which could see individuals suspected of illegal file-sharing cut off from the Internet – have claimed that the time allotted to the bill is not sufficient to deal with its complexity.
Opponents of the bill including the Open Rights Group (ORG) and campaigning organisation 38 Degrees claimed to have raised around £200,000 to pay for adverts in Tuesday’s Guardian and Times objecting to how the bill is being debated.
“Rather than subjecting it to the normal weeks of line-by-line scrutiny, politicians are planning to fast-track it into law before the general election, sidestepping debate and opposition,” the newspaper add states.
The ad claims that over 20,000 people have objected to the Bill, which could end up exacerbating file-sharing rather than eradicating it, as the music industry and government supporters hope. “There is no doubt that protecting copyright is an important and complicated issue but making new laws in a hurry is likely to make the situation worse not better,” the 38 Degrees ad states.
Taylor added that the bill would have benefits for the wider economy.”The reason why all the main political parties have supported this bill is that they realise that the creative economy is fundamental to our success as an economy over all as business increasingly moves onto the Internet.”
Digital rights activists, including the Open Rights Group and the UK Pirate Party, have been demonstrating outside Parliament over the last week against the Digital Economy Bill and encouraging people to write to their MPs in protest.
Last week it was reported that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was forced to drop its charges against a teenage boy, who was charged in 2007 with illegally distributing copyrighted material. The charge was dropped due to lack of evidence.
Fourth quarter results beat Wall Street expectations, as overall sales rise 6 percent, but EU…
Hate speech non-profit that defeated Elon Musk's lawsuit, warns X's Community Notes is failing to…
Good luck. Russia demands Google pay a fine worth more than the world's total GDP,…
Google Cloud signs up Spotify, Paramount Global as early customers of its first ARM-based cloud…
Facebook parent Meta warns of 'significant acceleration' in expenditures on AI infrastructure as revenue, profits…
Microsoft says Azure cloud revenues up 33 percent for September quarter as capital expenditures surge…
View Comments
This is a real threat to civil liberties - a third party with inaccurate information can have your internet cut off at a whim. Imagaine if this was water or electricity? Which? magazine has already cited many cases of legal letters being sent to internet users who do no illegal downloading. How do they know - and what surveillance are they doing? Internet access is an essential part of modern life and should not be removeable without the involvement of the courts
File-sharing is not illegal. The sharing of copyrighted material is.
One of the most popular forms of file-sharing is bittorrent. This is used for both legal and illegal sharing.
How will the government (or whatever new-fangled, out-of date and out-of-touch before it's formed) regulatory body differentiate between the legal and illegal sharing?
The only way to achieve this is to examine in minute detail all data that is passed in this manner (in turn requiring analysis of *ALL* traffic on an individual's internet connection), and must be a breach of privacy.