UK Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill, Now Look To Rush It Through Commons
from the as-expected dept
As was widely predicted, it looks like the UK Lords have passed the controversial Digital Economy Bill, a piece of legislation written by the entertainment industry against consumer interests, to try to prop up an obsolete business model. Now they’re planning to rush it through the Commons with little debate or chance to stop an incredibly dangerous bill — unless people start making some noise about how this bill is being rushed through, and the lack of any real public consultation or debate.
Filed Under: copyright, digital economy bill, uk
Comments on “UK Lords Pass Digital Economy Bill, Now Look To Rush It Through Commons”
What a surprise...
…I wonder how much was paid of the artist’s money was used to grease the Lord’s palms?
Does the house of lords even wield any power anymore? No wonder “Great” Britain isn’t so great anymore.
Re: Re:
Does the Senate even wield any power anymore(sic)? No wonder the “United” States isn’t so united anymore.
Re: Re: Re:
+1
Representational democracy failed, it’s dead and if it weren’t for all of the wedge issues everyone would have noticed this several years ago. The president said “I’ve had to make a lot of unpopular decisions to save our economy” in a speech to the import-export bank (I’ve never heard of it either..). That’s it in a nut shell, we elect monarchies and we have little choice in which one we choose. Theres little difference really, the choice is an illusion.
Divide and Conquer
BPI & ORG Fight
I was watching BPI and ORG debate the Digital Economy Bill at a talk yesterday. I’ve set out my lay observations of both sides in the linked blog post.
Re: BPI & ORG Fight
Plus ORG sent an open letter to the FT recently stating their opposition to the Lords’ amendment:
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2010/letter-to-the-ft
“Does the house of lords even wield any power anymore? No wonder “Great” Britain isn’t so great anymore.”
Er… do you have any clue what you are talking about…
Re: Re:
no. no he doesn’t.
Continuing the boycott!
I had a very unfriendly reality check over the weekend, one which reminded me why file sharing is a justified means of civil disobedience. It boggles my mind just how extremely anti-consumer and unfair the content industry is, all in the name of greed. Thankfully it strengthened my resolve to continue boycotting them, something I had begun to waver on over the past few weeks. Thanks for the reminder, fools! 😉
Lords?! In the 21st century?! W.T.F? Time to hang them by their balls and burn their properties. Most countries already did that a century ago. WTF is wrong with the Brits?!
If not now, then when?
Talking ’bout a Revoluuuutioooon…
Re: Re:
Gotta wonder how that whole revolution thing’s been working out in the USA. Seems like you just traded in ‘ancesters owned a lot of land or fought well in wars’ and the HoS’s favour for the ability to screw people over, lie through one’s teeth, look good on tv, and give and take bribes as a prerequisite for assuming exactly the same role…
Of course, NZ conveniently just did away with the whole concept of an upper house all together. In theory the governor does most of the same job. in practice they say a few formal lines around election time
To be fair tho – because the “Lords” are now awarded as honoury positions, and since they are non-electable and therefore, not desirable as position of ambitious power driven politicians, the Lords actually represents more balanced and sensible view points than the Common’s, but they aren’t controlled by party political agenda.
so where do we sign a petition against this?
Re: Re:
There is one on the Number 10 website if you have a UK address.
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/
Also the Open Rights Group have one.
“the Lords actually represents more balanced and sensible view points”
Until they get… what was it? Dinner on a private yacht?
Just typed “Mandelson” and “Yacht” into Google and it seems this is a regular thing.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4926572.ece
Here’s one with a great quote…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7690459.stm
“As business secretary I will continue to act with the public interest in mind, as the public has every right to expect.”
Yeah. Right. What a piece of shit this guy is.
http://order-order.com/2008/10/22/mandelson-gatecrashed-microsoft-ceos/
http://www.neurope.eu/articles/90308.php
“As usually happens with parties on yachts, as time goes by, further details become revealed, as now in the aside news coverage of Tory leader David Cameron being flown out to chat to Media Oligarch Rupert Murdoch on another yacht in September by Murdoch’s son in law, and then flown to Turkey to attend a birthday Bash with the Murdoch’s, Mandelson, and Deripaska it seems that the world really couldn’t’ get any smaller.”
http://www.johannhari.com/2009/11/18/peter-mandelsons-assault-on-science
“British science gave the world Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and Stephen Hawking. They figured out how we became human and the shape of the universe. Now Peter Mandelson wants to bend that great tradition to serve the yacht-owning overclass he adores. If he succeeds, we may never know the magnitude of our loss.”
making our voices heard
There are a number of petitions running on the Number 10 website, but the one I thought hit the more important issue is here: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/debcensorship/
There is also a protest organised for next Wednesday (24th March) in london:
http://debdemo.eventbrite.com/
“But firms such as British Telecom, Google and Facebook say that would be unfair and illegal file-sharers should be fined instead of cut off.”
I think they know how many people are actually file sharing and are scared for their bottom lines. If 20% of their customers are cut off that would be a major hit to their profitability. But that wont happen because like in other places (sweden, etc) people will switch to VPN, fileLockers, etc. Good luck to the brits on this
another great line ...
“But Andrew Robinson, from Pirate Party UK, which campaigns on the issue, said: “The public will not respect a law that was quite literally written by the record industry, for the record industry.”
An idea for our ISPs
Why don’t they partner with VPN providers to include VPN access in the broadband package? It would send a message loud and clear from the ISPs that they are not going to stand for this crap!
Perhaps it will pass both Houses in the UK and become law in the UK, thus proping up business models you opine are unsustainable. However, I am not at all clear about how its passage would impact, if at all, startups who choose to embrace the business models you promote. So long as these startups create their own original material such that copyright law would have no applicability to what they are pursuing, how would even “draconian” provisions applicable to copyright infringers detract from the pursuit of business by companies operating outside the boundaries/reach of copyright law?
Re: Re:
Perhaps it will pass both Houses in the UK and become law in the UK, thus proping up business models you opine are unsustainable. However, I am not at all clear about how its passage would impact, if at all, startups who choose to embrace the business models you promote. So long as these startups create their own original material such that copyright law would have no applicability to what they are pursuing, how would even “draconian” provisions applicable to copyright infringers detract from the pursuit of business by companies operating outside the boundaries/reach of copyright law?
The laws have the potential to make things like YouTube and other platforms that are useful for content creators illegal.
Do you not think that’s a problem?
The law has the potential to kick people offline based on false accusations of copyright infringement?
Do you not think that’s a problem?
You really amaze me sometimes how little respect you have for basic human dignity and civil rights. For someone who says they’re a lawyer, you seem to always side with the biggest corporate interests against individual rights. I wonder why.
Re: Re: Re:
In response to your two questions, I am not familiar with the provisions of the UK bill under consideration. Hence, I cannot provide a definitive answer. However, given that the bill is purportedly directed to copyright law in general, I believe my general observation still holds true. Create your own original work and copyright law will not apply.
As for your final paragraph, it unfortunately reflects a predisposition to question the motives of anyone who may offer a comment with which you may happen to disagree. I urge you to consider the possiblity that comments may be proferred that are not intended in the slightest to place you or the site in a negative light.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
In response to your two questions, I am not familiar with the provisions of the UK bill under consideration. Hence, I cannot provide a definitive answer. However, given that the bill is purportedly directed to copyright law in general, I believe my general observation still holds true. Create your own original work and copyright law will not apply.
So you are speaking PURPOSELY from a position of ignorance?
You do realize how ironic that is given that you repeatedly bash me personally for (you claim, often falsely) doing the same.
Stunning.
As for your final paragraph, it unfortunately reflects a predisposition to question the motives of anyone who may offer a comment with which you may happen to disagree.
No, sir. Just you. Your condescending language choices make it obvious who you are, and it’s difficult to take you seriously. But since I know your previous statements in favor of big companies and against basic human and civil rights I see no reason not to call you out on them.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I read the original bill about 2 or 3 months ago. It has since been amended and I have not as yet had the opportunity to read the amendments. In its then state the bill conformed to my comments.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Get a Clue
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So a alaw that negates due proxcess, as ne response format and no counternotice procedure is clearly in the interests of consumers?
I don’t normally use this, but shut the fuck up.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
…and stop affecting that pretentious tone in an attempt to portray your points as coming from an impartial disposition.
Thanks for sharing this article for us, seem good article. Keep sharing up this kind of articles dude 🙂
Dizi izle
Canlı Dizi izle