Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
Home > News > Webmaster > Internet Life

December 28th, 2009, 15:06 GMT · By

Anti-Piracy Measures in the UK Would Cost Consumers £500M

SHARE:

Adjust text size:


A new government report claims that new  anti-piracy measures in the UK could end up costing consumers £500 million
Enlarge picture
The fight against illegal file sharing is being taken to new height of ridiculousness in the UK where law-abiding citizens will have to, once again, pay up to bail out the music and movie industry for their own failures. The proposed Digital Economy Bill, which would force ISPs to kick-off alleged illegal file sharers, could end up costing broadband subscribers up to £500 million (about $800 million) per year and this is coming from the UK government itself.

The new law which is still under review would force ISPs to police their customers and cut off or slow down the connection of anyone the anti-piracy groups claim is infringing. The rights holders claim that these measures are necessary to stave off the 'plague' of piracy, which is wreaking havoc with the content industry's revenues. This despite the fact that both the music and the film industries are seeing growth in 2009.

When the legal proposal was first made public, the ISPs, expectedly, were very critical of the measures and estimated that the costs to implement them would outweigh the actual benefits. A figure of £365 million (slightly more than $580 million) was put forward by the Internet providers. It turns out that even this number may have been conservative as a new government report estimates that the costs may be closer to £500 million.

Just issuing the initial warning letters for all the supposed infringers would add up to £1.40 per subscriber, the report claims. Some estimate that for the proposed law would add about £25 per year to each subscriber's bill, though this figure comes from the ISPs and not the government report. Naturally, the ISPs are broadly against the plans.

“Broadband consumers shouldn’t have to bail out the music industry. If they really think it’s worth spending vast sums of money on these measures then they should be footing the bill; not the consumer,” Charles Dunstone, CEO of Carphone Warehouse, which owns TalkTalk the biggest broadband provider in the UK, told The Times.


FILED UNDER:
UK
ISP
piracy

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK:

1,984 hits · 2 comments · Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend · Subscribe to news

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


Norwegian ISP Doesn't Have to Cut Off Access to the Pirate Bay

Google Speaks Out Against Australia's Plans for Mandatory Internet Censorship

The Latest uTorrent 2.0 Could Encourage ISPs to Stop Throttling

YouTube to Add Support for IPv6

Public DNS Service from Google Raises New Concerns

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Eric on 28 Dec 2009, 21:26 UTC reply to this comment

This is silly. The music industry claims piracy is hurting their sales, but they don't really have any proof. If they view each mp3 downloaded as a "lost sale", then they are delusional, because not everyone that downloads music illegally would ever have bought the music to begin with. What do their base their claims of "wreaking havoc with the content industry's revenues" on? Their declining sales? How do they objectively measure that piracy is the culprit?

I'm sure that piracy could be behind some of the lag in sales, but my speculation is worth as much as theirs. If the government is going to institute a law that strips consumers of freedoms and turns the Internet over to the hands of anti-piracy groups, I'd want some more substantial claims than "our profits are down, therefore lets go after pirates".

I have no doubt that piracy hurts content providers. But let's do some real research and figure out, concretely, what affects it has before we start passing stupid, restrictive laws that just end up hurting consumers!


Comment #2 by: Carl Barron on 29 Dec 2009, 15:46 UTC reply to this comment

Mandy’s Meddling’s will cost us all a lot more than £500 million.

If Mandy gets his bill into Law to enable Copyright material to be re-written under ‘Section 17’ of this proposed act. Once the Law is in force all Copyright Material will be deemed as ‘Legally Compromised’, hence made Nil in Void and as Copyright is matched to the Patent the Patent is also ‘Legally Compromised’ made Nil in Void.

I’m sure Bill Gates (for one) will be chuffed to bits when he finds this out. One of the biggest losers would be the Drug companies as all their products for sale or distributed in the UK during the time that law is in effect deems their rights Nil in Void.

Most all documents used in the transfer process of the Stock Markets are Copyright Protected so these to will be deemed as ‘Nil in Void, legally worthless. The far ranging effects of Mandy’s meddling will cause havoc as Share Prices are lost and Patents and Copyright’s are lost. Even currency is Copyright Protected hence it also would become ‘Nil in Void’ worthless, non-legal tender.

Hence Mandy’s so-called ‘Digital Rights Act/ Digital Economy Bill’ is legally seriously flawed.

Why will Mandy’s law makes all Copyright material ‘Legally Compromised’ made Nil in Void you ask?

Click on link to read legal info and supporting links: http://carl-agpcuk.livejournal.com/

Signed Carl Barron Chairman of agpcuk

Digital Economy Bill sparks peers' protest
http://www.pcr-online.biz/news/32849/Digital-Economy-Bill-sparks-peers-protest

Copyright © 2001-2012 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM