Comments on: Government to ban illegal filesharers from the internet? http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/ Protecting your rights in the digital age Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:51:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Government to consult on legislation to curb illicit filesharing as industry agrees voluntary scheme http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-164274 The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Government to consult on legislation to curb illicit filesharing as industry agrees voluntary scheme Thu, 24 Jul 2008 12:05:07 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-164274 [...] the Open Rights Group has set out exhaustively on this site and in the media, disconnection is not a good option – either for internet users or for the [...] [...] the Open Rights Group has set out exhaustively on this site and in the media, disconnection is not a good option – either for internet users or for the [...]

]]> By: The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Write to your MEP: say no to “3 strikes” through the backdoor http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-164048 The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Write to your MEP: say no to “3 strikes” through the backdoor Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:37:53 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-164048 [...] in February, we reported that the UK Government was considering a law to ban illicit filesharers from the ‘net. A [...] [...] in February, we reported that the UK Government was considering a law to ban illicit filesharers from the ‘net. A [...]

]]> By: The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » ORG is hiring! http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163617 The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » ORG is hiring! Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:41:16 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163617 [...] and committed digital rights campaigner to amplify our work on issues around copyright reform and copyright infringement, taking the concerns of ORG and its supporters to Europe and [...] [...] and committed digital rights campaigner to amplify our work on issues around copyright reform and copyright infringement, taking the concerns of ORG and its supporters to Europe and [...]

]]> By: The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » European Parliament condemns “3 strikes” approach http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163522 The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » European Parliament condemns “3 strikes” approach Thu, 10 Apr 2008 11:07:11 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163522 [...] filesharing this Spring. We’ve already blogged about ORG’s objections to UK proposals here. In short, and as the European Parliament have recognised today, they are disproportionate, they [...] [...] filesharing this Spring. We’ve already blogged about ORG’s objections to UK proposals here. In short, and as the European Parliament have recognised today, they are disproportionate, they [...]

]]> By: Dynamo_ace http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163274 Dynamo_ace Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:36:08 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163274 Update: there seems to be two petitions i know that are doing this on 10 Downing street's website. http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/LawyerISP/ (349 Signitures at time of press) http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/openinternet/ (201 Sigintures at time of press) I also sense propaganda coming from a new set one of the anti-pirate's new research units as well as some foul play. Update: there seems to be two petitions i know that are doing this on 10 Downing street’s website.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/LawyerISP/ (349 Signitures at time of press)

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/openinternet/ (201 Sigintures at time of press)

I also sense propaganda coming from a new set one of the anti-pirate’s new research units as well as some foul play.

]]> By: Dynamo_ace http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163260 Dynamo_ace Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:47:46 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163260 On the subject of the 10 Downing street petition, Can anyone compare the signatures of the astroturfer's petition to the one linked by Patrick? (They are both on the same site so it should not be difficult to find) On the subject of the 10 Downing street petition, Can anyone compare the signatures of the astroturfer’s petition to the one linked by Patrick?

(They are both on the same site so it should not be difficult to find)

]]> By: Patrick http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163244 Patrick Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:35:46 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163244 There's a petition on http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/LawyerISP/ There’s a petition on

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/LawyerISP/

]]> By: David Harris http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163189 David Harris Sun, 24 Feb 2008 09:29:50 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163189 There is a pledge related to this: http://www.pledgebank.com/filesharing There is a pledge related to this: http://www.pledgebank.com/filesharing

]]> By: Lex Ferenda » Disconnected rights http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163170 Lex Ferenda » Disconnected rights Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:06:32 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163170 [...] Following copyright law leads you to unusual stories. That much is true. The story that broke through into the popular press last week (example: BBC), though, is quite iffy even by those standards. Yes, I’m talking about the (leaked) proposal in the UK to provide that those engaged in illegal filesharing would be ‘banned from the Internet’ (have their Net access contracts terminated); the Open Rights Group (one of the best NGOs on these issues in the world) have been talking about this for some time. [...] [...] Following copyright law leads you to unusual stories. That much is true. The story that broke through into the popular press last week (example: BBC), though, is quite iffy even by those standards. Yes, I’m talking about the (leaked) proposal in the UK to provide that those engaged in illegal filesharing would be ‘banned from the Internet’ (have their Net access contracts terminated); the Open Rights Group (one of the best NGOs on these issues in the world) have been talking about this for some time. [...]

]]> By: Becky http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163168 Becky Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:40:19 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-filesharers-from-the-internet/#comment-163168 Hi MJ Ray Where it differs from blank media levies is that it is not a mandatory, imposed cost on consumers. My suggestion was that consumers could elect to pay an additional fee for access to a licensed peer to peer filesharing facility (and yes, Dynamo Ace, I agree that this could/should be extended to all media). I do not agree with your assumption, MJ Ray, that ISPs would not track and report a full breakdown - in an environment where, eg watermarking tools, were being used for audit, and not enforcement, purposes, such a system would be efficient and cheap to maintain, as there would be no circumvention motivation. I also do not see how a new right would need to be created in order for this to take place, so do not follow your logic that this would create "new enclosures". But perhaps I have missed something? Having said all this, ORG's main objections to the current approach of ISP / rightsholder cooperation (this 3 strikes idea) are: 1) It is disproportionate 2) It lacks consumer safeguards 3) It is technically infeasible I advocate for alterantive possibilities in the hope that, as in the past, we might give entrepreneurs the time they need to develop models that properly remit artists in a new technological environment, rather than develop knee-jerk legislation that serves only to prop up old business models and stunt technological innovation. Hi MJ Ray

Where it differs from blank media levies is that it is not a mandatory, imposed cost on consumers. My suggestion was that consumers could elect to pay an additional fee for access to a licensed peer to peer filesharing facility (and yes, Dynamo Ace, I agree that this could/should be extended to all media). I do not agree with your assumption, MJ Ray, that ISPs would not track and report a full breakdown - in an environment where, eg watermarking tools, were being used for audit, and not enforcement, purposes, such a system would be efficient and cheap to maintain, as there would be no circumvention motivation.

I also do not see how a new right would need to be created in order for this to take place, so do not follow your logic that this would create “new enclosures”. But perhaps I have missed something?

Having said all this, ORG’s main objections to the current approach of ISP / rightsholder cooperation (this 3 strikes idea) are:

1) It is disproportionate
2) It lacks consumer safeguards
3) It is technically infeasible

I advocate for alterantive possibilities in the hope that, as in the past, we might give entrepreneurs the time they need to develop models that properly remit artists in a new technological environment, rather than develop knee-jerk legislation that serves only to prop up old business models and stunt technological innovation.

]]>