Slashdot Mirror
Major ISPs Challenge UK's Digital Economy Act
Techmeology writes "TalkTalk and BT, two of the UK's largest ISPs, seek to legally challenge the UK's Digital Economy Act, which was rushed through parliament during its last days prior to the election. TalkTalk and BT argue that the DEA infringes human rights and places large ISPs (with over 400,000 customers) at a disadvantage. They also believe the DEA could conflict with existing European Legislation such as the Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive, and the E-Commerce Directive — the latter stating that ISPs are not responsible for the actions of their customers. The Act, which saw twenty thousand letters sent to MPs in protest, contains measures to see websites suspected of distributing illegal material blocked, and Internet users disconnected or reported to copyright holders."
BT doing something right for a change? Wonders will never cease!
One of the bigger problems with this act that few discuss is that it indirectly makes it illegal to operate a free Wi-Fi service. At the very least you would need to register with the Wi-Fi provider before you could use their service so they can pass on infringement notices to you otherwise they might be left holding the torch when the lawsuit hits.
Chect TFA - they are not opposing this because they think the *concept* is wrong. It's because the law would only apply to ISPs with more than 400,000 subscribers. They are worried that people will shift to other smaller ISP who don't do the monitoring. They're just worried about their bottom line.
Trouble is that worldwide, politicians are relatively old people who know absolutely nothing about computers, the internet and whatever. They are often too old to have grown up with it. They have no time to learn about this new technology. They are one of the few people who do nearly all their talking and negotiating face-to-face. They still use paper copies of everything they do.
So, I don't think it's surprising that the laws regarding the digital world completely suck and are nearly 100% dictated by the large industry and companies, and are in no way protecting the general public.
Things may change - I just hope that it's not too late.
And therefore, I cheer at any delay - a delay is a victory, because the longer we wait, the bigger the chance that our politicians actually understand the matter at hand.
For the first time since, well, quite a long time, we have no sizeable opposition in Parliament.
What? Were you born since May?
After the 2005 election (results) Labour had 354 MPs, everyone else had 292. Any law Labour wanted, they got (hence ID cards, stop and search, etc).
After the 2010 election (results), the Con-Lib coalition has 362 MPs, everyone else has 248. Any law Con-Lib wants they'll get.
That's how the House of Commons works (regardless of whether you agree with it or not).
OK--perhaps it will have little effect on anybody taking decisions, but it won't take more than a few minutes of your time, and if it can drive stories in the press etc, so much the better.
And it's much less true for the coalition than it was for labour. The extreme wings of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties are unlikely to agree on anything, but the moderates in both parties require their cooperation to pass laws. If Cameron tries forcing conservative policies through, Clegg faces a rebellion in his own party if he agrees and the coalition falls apart. If Clegg tries to push some of the more extreme liberal policies, the centrist Conservatives won't back him and they fail. A back-bench rebellion is far more likely with the coalition than with any single party.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Trouble is that worldwide, politicians are relatively old people who know absolutely nothing about computers, the internet and whatever. They are often too old to have grown up with it.
That argument is getting old, too. I'm older than our Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, and have been working with computers since my youth and have been online (via bulletin boards) since my college days. These things go back longer than the young guns realise, and if politicians don't understand them then there has to be another reason.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
I'm sure they have an effect. The difference is that Labour and Conservative are dependent on corporate funding, the Liberal Democrats are not (mainly because they've never been able to raise significant amounts).
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?