Did The Recording Industry Really Step Back From Three Strikes? Or Is It Playing Word Games?
from the don't-buy-it dept
Now, clearly, that might sound like backing away from three strikes, but I don't think it does. That's because we saw nearly the same thing a year and a half ago in the debate in the UK over the Digital Economy Act, where politicians supporting the Act, which is a variation on "three strikes" fought back against the public campaign against the Act by declaring that "disconnection" was no longer on the table. But, really, they were just playing word games. What they meant was permanent disconnection wasn't on the table, but it wasn't really ever in the bill. They were still very much in favor of so-called "temporary account suspension" which could last six months or more in some cases.
In other words, it's a terminology issue more than anything else. Many people are concerned about any internet access account loss, and consider a six month suspension to be pretty bad. But to avoid the dreaded "termination" or "disconnection" buzzword, supporters of three strikes now like to claim that their plans include no such thing -- instead it's just a "temporary account suspension." I'm guessing that this is exactly what the MIPI folks meant by saying they don't favor termination, but do favor mitigation. That mitigation might just turn out to be a "temporary" account suspension for three strikes. So, my sense is that this story is overblown. MIPI has carefully chosen language to make it seem not as extreme and to not anger as many people, but it could still very much support three strikes... just for extended "temporary" disconnections.