UK High Court upholds the Digital Economy Act

The UK's High court has rejected a legal challenge by Talk Talk broadband and BT at the legality in light of European law of the right of content producers to force ISPs to disconnect suspected illegal file sharers from the internet. The powers became law under the extremely controversial Digital Economy Act 2010 which was rushed through parliament in the "wash up period" prior to the 2010 general election.

The UK government will now proceed with the logistics of putting the necessary framework in place to bring the law into force. The question remains, however, over the cost of enforcing measures. The court upheld one aspect of the two giant UK ISPs petition in the judicial review that the legislation highlighted that as it stands, to high an administrative, technical and therefore financial burden is placed upon ISPs.

The key issue remains that on the word of a copyright holder, your household could face bandwidth capping and ultimately disconnection from the internet. Many have questioned the ethics of doing so, not least the UK's Pirate Party, who argue that broadband internet is a fundamental human right.

The copyright holders focus isn't on this point, however, it's all about protecting their existing business models and revenue streams despite the way we consume information having changed beyond recognition in the past 15 years. The BPI's (UK equivalent of the RIAA) chief executive, Geoff Taylor, wade his position clear:

This judgement gives the green light for action to tackle illegal downloading in the UK.

Green light in hand however, the big question is, who foots the enforcement bill?

 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft adjusts Xbox 360 Indie games rating system

Next Story

Microsoft Vulnerability Research discovers two Chrome flaws

36 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I've honestly given up debating and voicing opinion about topics like this.
money is the ruler here. they have cash to pay lobbyist represents them
we elect people represent us but they always get bought out because
of the creed for money....

And just till one ISP that happens to be a "copyright holder" decides to use this farce of a law as a way to attack their competitor's. Just using it to force their rivals to Disconnect their own customers.
I mean with this what level of Proof does the "copyright holder" have to supply?

What if you have a house guest that uses your computer and does so in a violating manner? Or what about children that live with their parents that use the family computer and don't follow or understand laws like this? So your Internet will be turned off because your equipment was used by a violator? And least we forget hackers and spoofers.

keuka said,
What if you have a house guest that uses your computer and does so in a violating manner? Or what about children that live with their parents that use the family computer and don't follow or understand laws like this? So your Internet will be turned off because your equipment was used by a violator? And least we forget hackers and spoofers.

All very very good questions that I have yet to see an answer to.

Depicus said,

All very very good questions that I have yet to see an answer to.

The answer is..... It's your connection, you are responsible for it.....

bugsbungee said,

The answer is..... It's your connection, you are responsible for it.....

That's like saying "A car was used to kill 10 pedestrians... and it was yours so therefore you'll be going to jail" even though it was broken into and used by a violator of the law, not yourself.

The Teej said,
That's like saying "A car was used to kill 10 pedestrians... and it was yours so therefore you'll be going to jail" even though it was broken into and used by a violator of the law, not yourself.
No, it's like saying your teenage son took the car and killed 10 pedestrians... which you are perfectly responsible for.

JHH said,
No, it's like saying your teenage son took the car and killed 10 pedestrians... which you are perfectly responsible for.

And if your neighbor or friend took the car, still responsible for the 10 killed pedestrians? That brings up another point what if a neighbor steals your wifi and illegally uses the connection to download songs, are you the one that's gonna have to pay?

keuka said,

That brings up another point what if a neighbor steals your wifi and illegally uses the connection to download songs, are you the one that's gonna have to pay?

If you fail to adequately secure your connection, you should be held responsible for illegal activity that occurs when an unauthorised person uses it.

I doubt the ISP 's costs would go up due to enforcement as with less pirating , their internet traffic will drop massively!

This is utterly ridiculous, and the Conservatives are letting it go on as they took the moral high ground by not voting against it (or in most cases not voting at all) so they can say its not their fault.

Question from an idiot here but here we go anyway:

Couldnt the ISP simply refuse, and state that if the Government wants to monitor illegal downloaders, they will have to use their own staff, and bear the burden themselves? They cant force this upon ISP's and expect them to bear the burden surely?

Benjy91 said,
Question from an idiot here but here we go anyway:

Couldnt the ISP simply refuse, and state that if the Government wants to monitor illegal downloaders, they will have to use their own staff, and bear the burden themselves? They cant force this upon ISP's and expect them to bear the burden surely?


Talk Talk claimed that they would refuse if they lost this court case, and that they would take it to European court if necessary. I would love to see them come through.

Internet taken away, yet it's a requirement for a lot of people's jobs and general social lives in general. For any people who work from home, if busted, they could quite easily lose their jobs, thus increasing the already very high, unemployment rate. They should be concentrating their efforts into fixing more vital issues in the country before even considering something so petty (and expensive) as this!

Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

LOL
+1 Haha...

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

AWESOME!

GS:mac

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

LMAO!

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

Don't forget the wheelchair.

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

ROFLMAO! Epic!

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.
+1 Neowin needs a like button for comments like that!

Benjy91 said,
Can we get a Gay Black Muslim Vegetarian Polar Bear to simply complain it's against his Human Rights to the EU. With those bases covered he can't lose.

does exist some sort of NRA association in EU?

stevember said,

Fully backed by Tories.

Also, the Lib Dems claimed to be against this law, and said that if they got in, they would work to fully repeal it. So yeah, just another lie to add to their massive list...

Don't you just love how there's not a single uncorrupted person in government? You ever seen that Southpark episode where they had to vote for either a giant douche or a turd sandwich?

I was thinking, these ISP's still should be able to take it to the European Court of Human Rights for one last try. whether they will or not is another matter.

Inklin said,
I was thinking, these ISP's still should be able to take it to the European Court of Human Rights for one last try. whether they will or not is another matter.

Definitely agree

neufuse said,
who pays for it? duh the customers, ISP's will jack up rates to cover enforcement

Well, ISP's should at least charge Copyright owners for the price, afterall it's their product they'll be protecting.

The big brother stuff is getting ridiculous. I do not support piracy in any way, but laws like this are too easy to abuse...

M_Lyons10 said,
The big brother stuff is getting ridiculous. I do not support piracy in any way, but laws like this are too easy to abuse...

****ing corporations have control of our laws, the laws are designed for the people and there is no evidence that piracy hurts business but there is evidence that it does help business.

I download a lot of films, I also have an unlimited cinema ticket. But I would still have my connection taken down.. idiots.

The UK high court are suppose to look after human rights and make sure their justice. They know how laws work they don't know how the internet works.

Edited by Gaffney, Apr 21 2011, 8:31am :