Your Views: Digital Economy Bill
By Nicole Kobie,
Piracy is a complicated issue, though that's not often acknowledged by the sides arguing about online copyright and internet freedoms - which is a problem as the Digital Economy Bill makes its way though parliament.
Should illegal file sharers have broadband connections cut off? Or is that just bowing to big music companies? Is freedom more important that copyright protection?
Regardless of whether the bill is passed - and it may very well be rushed through before the looming election - the issue of copyright protection and piracy online will remain complicated for some time.
We asked readers of our biweekly newsletter for their thoughts - and like any group of people, the answers were pretty varied.
David said online freedom is worth protecting. "It would be a sad day if net freedom was scuppered in order to legistate against piracy. [The bill] needs [to be] more finely nuanced."
Daz said copyright needs to be protected, but not in the way the bill puts forward. "To begin with, the Digital Economy Bill is a bad joke being hurriedly put together by people who do not even understand the problem and issues concerned," he said.
"Yes copyright should be protected, but by who? Is it really a governmental issue? Seems to me it is more to do with pressure from the music and film industries, potential losses of tax revenue and pushing the blame on to the general public for downloading this material whether they are aware that it is supposed to be illegal or not," he added.
"It is all nonsense. The music and movie industry should do their own dirty work and not waste tax payers money by making it a government issue," Daz said.
Artists may think differently...
Claire is an artist, and wants her work protected. "I find piracy of any copyright material, whether software, literature or art or music totally wrong and deserving punishment," she wrote.
"I do not feel 'stalked' by the police when I walk the streets so why should I feel the same when using the internet? If we are innocent then we have no need to fear I would have thought," she added.
Michael is also an artist, and while he wants protection, doesn't think the Government is doing much about it. "The copyright laws do indeed need amending, but a great deal of debate and the involvement of all those affected by copyright protection need to be consulted, my MP certainly has not asked me my views - perhaps he should, it's his job after all."
"Any bill that is rushed through Parliament inevitably needs to be revised... the Digital Economy Bill is no exception," he added.
Mark said it's time the internet had to consider laws in the real world. "The gold rush is over. We now need to put real laws in place and make the internet as law abiding as the real world."
What about business costs?
Colin is the director of a small ISP and worried about how the bill could affect his business. "How can we be held responsible for what our customers do with the connections which we bill them for when we have no practical means of monitoring or controlling usage?"
"As a small organisation, it is tough enough meeting current legal requirements for retention of email logs for the service we provide through our mail servers," he said. "We get the feeling that big Government really wants to drive us out of business along with all the other small providers of internet services. It's tough enough for us to survive anyway without such onerous requirements."
"If ISPs are to be held responsible for what passes over their networks why doesn't the same rule apply to the Post Office or all the parcel companies out there which probably carry even more illegal material?"
You may also like...
Sponsored Links
advertisement
You may also like...
Latest Mail Servers Reviews
Fujitsu ScanSnap N1800 review
Rating: ![]()
- Head to Head: Mac OS X 10.7 Lion vs Windows 7
- Websense Triton Security Gateway Anywhere review
- Kemp Technologies LoadMaster 3600 review
- Office 365 review: First look
- CronLab Pro 2000 Anti-Spam Appliance review
- Winfrasoft Gateway Appliance 9500-DE review
- Celestix MSA 3200i review
- eSoft InstaGate 806 review
- EXCLUSIVE - eSoft ThreatWall 250
advertisement
Most popular
- Ubuntu vs. Windows 7 on the business desktop
- York researchers heat storage to speed up data
- BlackBerry Bold 9790 review
- OneNote hits Google?s Android
- O2 trials Olympic-scale remote working
- Will someone rid me of these troublesome Macs?
- Lenovo beats expectations again
- Who to trust after the VeriSign hack?
- Google to promise fairness after Motorola buy
- Report: Google cloud storage coming soon
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.



Rip off
Fair enough downloading music/films without paying for them is wrong. However, the rip off prices the music/film industry chareges for its wares is also wrong and should be looked at under this bill. Charging 79p for a very poor quality mp3 file of one track is a rip off. If they charged 40p no one would bother downloading an even worse copy. Though I agree that illegal downloading is wrong, I am afraid I have very little sympathy for the music/film industry whilst they continue to rip me off. It is the artists I feel sorry for.
By Birdmaniw on Tuesday Mar 23
Is it fair?
If it were possible for me to download £5.00 a week from the pay packets of everyone who thinks that illegal file-sharing is ok, would those same people view my activities with equal tolerance? I don't think so. We don't HAVE to have music/films/apps. We don't need these things to live. But if we want them, we should pay the people who provide them. Try helping yourself to an illegal download of Heinz baked beans the next time you are in Sainsbury's and see what happens. And I bet no one would witter on about the Bean Police when they showed up. We used to be World leaders in the Music Industry but not any more. If we insist on free music in this country, we will kill any remaining good music and have to put up with happy-hobbyists escaping from their day-jobs and going into the garden shed to compose, record and upload their latest offering. A tiny fraction may be fantastic, but is this the future we really want? Lets be fair and pay for what we use and avoid a bleak tomorrow.
By Barratt on Tuesday Mar 23
Better still sponsorship deals
Taking a product and not paying for it is wrong, however you all watch itv channel4 and a multitude of other stations who all get their revenue by advertising and sponsorship. Wouldn't all this be so much simpler if there was a way of downloading the same content sponsored, then no-one would even consider downloading dodgy copies, and the manufacturers and artists would probably gain even more revenue as you would directly hit the people who are interested in your vocal talent or programming skills.
By Neolithian on Wednesday Mar 24