ITPRO

Printed from www.itpro.co.uk

Register to receive our regular email newsletter at http://www.itpro.co.uk/reg/register.

The newsletter contains links to our latest IT news, product reviews, features and how-to guides, plus special offers and competitions.

Skip to navigation

    Digital Economy Bill to cost ISPs up to £500 million

Internet service providers are set to front up to £500 million of the bill to put in place Government plans hoping to cut copyright infringement.

By Jennifer Scott, 18 Mar 2010 at 16:32

ISPs

Government plans to cut down on copyright infringement are set to cost internet service providers (ISPs) up to £500 million, according to an assessment by the department championing the Digital Economy bill.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) showed in its initial impact assessment back in November that measures to stop users downloading pirated material – including notifying infringers and setting up call centre – would cost ISPs in between £250 million and £500 million but measured this against the potential £1,700 million advantage for rights holders.

This week the impact assessment was updated and presented to parliament, in what many see as an attempt to rush the bill through before the next general election – expected on 6 May.

The minister for Digital Britain, Stephen Timms, claimed in January that the funding should be a 75/25 split with rights holders covering the majority and ISPs taking the minority.

The report didn’t go didn’t go into figures but merely “[conferred] a power on the Secretary of State” to set out the balance of funding between the two sides.

The main concern for consumers is that any extra costs to ISPs will be passed onto them through higher broadband costs or line rentals.

BIS defended the costs by saying the majority will still fall on the rights holders as Timms suggested.

"Many of the figures in the impact assessment for the Digital Economy Bill are expressed in ranges, and we expect the bulk of the costs to be borne by the right holders - like record, film and TV companies - and some by the ISPs,” a BIS spokesperson told IT PRO.

"Since the impact assessment was published we have made our views clearer on how the costs of our proposals are shared with the biggest proportion being born by copyright owners – the draft Statutory Instruments suggested 75 per cent – and internet service providers bearing the rest. This should mean that less of the costs are passed to the public."

However, not everybody thinks the ISPs should be paying.

Andrew Heaney, executive director of strategy and regulation for TalkTalk and outspoken critic of the bill, claimed the issue was “a complicated beast.”

“It is unclear what the total cost will be,” he told IT PRO, “[It] depends on how many letters, how sent, what sort of databases we need to put in place, what other 'technical measures' might be introduced, to what degree etc.”

“[But the] Government (BIS) estimated at £35 million up front plus £30-50 million per year for just letter writing. This is probably in right ball park.”

“We will keep on fighting that 25 per cent is 25 per cent too much and ISPs (and in fact ISP customers) should not pay a penny for helping out rights holders to protect their rights.”

The bill, which was given the thumbs up by the House of Lords this week, is continuing to create controversy.

Email to a friend

Print this page

Previous
1 2
< Previous   Public Sector : News Next >

2 comments

You need to Login or Register to comment.

Sponsorship is the way to go

It seems to me that the whole approach to piracy needs a re-think. We are in an age where tv advertisers are having declining revenues due to people skipping the adverts during their favourite shows, yet people want to watch these same shows and films whilst on the move or watch because they have missed something on the regular schedule. Piracy and copyright always have and always will be issues that will have to be contended with, this is a fact. The scale of the problem however will fluctuate dependant on how easy it is to do, and if there are legal alternatives. Can the various pirated media be passed on in other ways ? Well I would have thought if people had a legal avenue to download sposored media, they would use it. This would also shift manufacturers of the media to produce a popular product to generate higher revenue, and therefore more lucrative sponsorship deals.

By Neolithian on Friday Mar 19

2 people out of 2 found this comment useful.

Did you find it useful?

Wasted money

This is going to be 500 million (at least 500 million) waisted. Persistent offenders are already make a move to encrypted secure services such as VPNs, secure proxies, P2P clients that use encryption, TOR protocol etc. All of these render DPI ineffective and useless. So what's next? Ban cryptography? Regulate it? Make people register their public and private keys and password with the government, telling them that it's ok because they can trust the government?

By scott_deagan on Friday Mar 19

6 people out of 6 found this comment useful.

Did you find it useful?

    You may also like...

 Sponsored Links

advertisement

    You may also like...

advertisement

    Register for IT PRO

You'll get exclusive member benefits including free whitepapers, downloads, Webinars and weekly newsletters full of the latest IT PRO news, reviews, insight and expertise.

Sponsored Links
Advertisement