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...
- Inglewood Told To Pay $118k Of Taxpayer Money For Abusing Copyright Law To Silence A Critic
- Colorado Judge Ignores First Amendment, Allows Prior Restraint In Banning Aretha Franklin Film
- As Part Of Its War On Encryption, Russia Briefly Blocks All Of Wikipedia Over One Weed Reference
- Google Disappears Techdirt Article About Right To Be Forgotten Due To Right To Be Forgotten Request
- Carl Malamud Asks YouTube To Institute Three Strikes Policy For Those Who Abuse Takedowns