Group items tagged

The United Kingdom parliament has passed the Digital Economy Bill, an extensive and controversial piece of legislation, by a vote of 189 to 47. The legislation encompasses online copyright infringement, Internet piracy, regulation of TV and radio, the classification of video games, regulations over ISPs, and a hodgepodge of other digital topics.

Baking surveillance, control and censorship into the very fabric of our networks, devices and laws is the absolute road to dictatorial hell. This interesting article discusses legislative measures taken in the UK regarding the digital economy. The first question that springs to mind is - how will it be enforced in an effective way?

Amendments made to the digital economy bill last week, handing courts the power to force internet service providers (ISPs) to block certain websites, threaten freedom of speech and will lead to British websites being blocked without due judicial process, the chief executives of leading technology companies said in an open letter to the Financial Times. The heads of the four largest UK internet service providers as well as Google, Facebook, eBay and Yahoo have all co-signed the letter, along with consumer groups and academics, objecting to amendment. Theoretically the amendment could lead to sites such as YouTube being blocked in the UK.

Information about the Digital Economy Bill provided by the UK Parliament. Includes a summary of the bill, its progress, latest news and the link to the full bill.

The "Digital Economy Bill" has been passed by the Lords and is now expected to be rushed through the Commons before the general elections. Despite criticism by the UK's major telecommunication providers and global internet giants like Google, the government said it was still committed to giving courts the power to block websites which are infringing copyright. The bill is mainly aiming to tackle internet privacy. Some of it's paragraphs however could lead to internet censorship.

The UK Government are proposing to introduce a Digital Economy Bill.  The owners of copyright material will be able to pursue individuals who are sharing their content and take legal recourse.  Persistent offenders can eventually be blocked by their ISP. "Persistent" offenders will have received 50 notices before the Government can request that the ISP block their access to the internet. Sites that host material / content that breaches the bill will be issued with a series of take down notices. This impacts all sites - not just those whose servers are based in the UK.  If the site does not comply with the take down notice it will be possible for the site to be blocked within the UK. 

A 'Digital Economy Bill' was passed by the House of Lords recently, and this article look at its implications for internet users whose freedom to share files will be punishable by a severing of their internet connection.

Interview with Jason Lanierm, an apparent "digital guru" who has changed his view of open culture to that which promotes a "digital maoism". He proposes that we need to pay people for the brain work that they do instead of encouraging them to be labourers of sorts. 

The rise of the internet economy has occurred at a time when the gender gap is increasing in IT and ICT areas. A deeper look at the nature of internet architecture and whether "code is law" might help answer 'which came first? the gender or the tech?'.

This articles mentions the major highlights of the Australian Communications and Media Authority's Communications Report 2008-2009. Among the differents findings, are available some data about mobile service, mobile network, suscribers, wireless broadband, dowloadings, online advertising , expenditures, revenue, etc. It's all about the digital convergence, the Digital Economy and a demand for flexibility.

So, The UK legislated, before the election, to make ISPs monitor subscribers using illegal downloading sites. As you see in the article. The Lib Dems don't like it much. But since they are just the whiney younger sibling in the New Coalition, their opinion doesn't matter that much and the Conservatives decided to keep it for the moment to 'see how it goes'. Watch this space ...

The Digital economy Act in all its glory. There was a LOT of debate over this Act. It was introduced by Lord Mandelson of the Labour party, tossed back and forth between houses with amendments that were argued to the minutest detail, then finally spat out for the public to revile. All ISPs are now required to monitor their subscibers use of listed sites and warn them when they enter a site that enables pirating. They must then record every such warning, giving every subscriber a number, then make the list available to the government when they get a warrant to look for excessive downloaders. Only the government like this idea, because it makes their job easier. I wandered onto one of the listed sites recently in my quest to find Dr Who episodes before they aired in Australia. The message was like driving down the highway and suddenly seeing a police car parked on the side of the road. You might know you haven't done anything wrong (yet) but you still get a scare ...

Yes, I know you love this - we all do. The regulations have been released! We'll never know if they are a best-seller, as they are free for download by anyone (a little ironic, actually), but the Ofcom, the ACMA of the UK, has released the regulations for the Digital Economies Act. What this does is fills in the details of what the ISPs will be doing exactly, what the processes will be - basically just the fussy details that are too specific for an act. Also, it will have information that may need to be updated regularly (like lists of prohibited sites). Regulations can be made and changed without consulting the government, so Ofcom basically has free rein from hereon in ...

Call for consultation regarding Australian government's mandatory internet filtering scheme. 

"Australia's biggest technology companies, communications academics and many lobby groups have delivered a withering critique of the government's plans to censor the internet." (quoting smh, 23/3/10, 4.40pm)

A Crikey article on DBCDE's proposal of mandatory filtering and the "Submissions on measures to increase accountability and transparency for Refused Classification material". The Government's courting of mandatory filtering has drawn widespread criticism from such stakeholders as Google, the Internet Industry Association and highly regarded academics such as Professors Catherine Lumby, Lelia Greean and John Hartley. One of the main concerns is that the scope of the filtering is too wide and will have major implications on what content is available online. This article also helpfully provides links to some of the submissions.