by Mike Masnick
Thu, Mar 11th 2010 4:47pm
Lobbying groups and activists write proposed legislation all the time -- it's part of how the process works. But with controversial legislation, you would at least think that politicians would be sensitive to some of the concerns of others before essentially doing a copy-and-paste on what the lobbyists give them. Not so when it comes to copyright in the UK, apparently. We had already discussed the silly proposal to alter the already ridiculously bad (and also written by the entertainment industry) Digital Economy Bill, to allow the courts to block weblocker type sites, if they were regularly used to infringe on copyrights. Now some leaked documents are showing that it was a pretty blatant copy-and-paste job from the BPI, the UK's equivalent of the RIAA. The BPI wrote up a draft and the politicians basically proposed it as is. You would think, at the very least, knowing the controversy over this topic, that they would have considered what others had to say on the issue. But I guess when your role as a politician is to be little more than a sock puppet for the industry, it's easier just to propose the legislation given to you.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Latest Russian Censorship Move: Banning Internet Memes Using Photos Of Celebrities
- Turkish Censorship Order Targets Single Blog Post, Ends Up Blocking Access To 60 Million Wordpress Sites
- USPTO Demands EFF Censor Its Comments On Patentable Subject Matter
- FBI Uncovers Another Of Its Own Plots, Senator Feinstein Responds By Saying We Should Censor The Internet
- Following Canada's Bad Example, Now UK Wants To Muzzle Scientists And Their Inconvenient Truths