Fifty Strikes and… we'll tell your Mum
Serial file sharing OK, say Lib Dems
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Unlicensed file sharers have a new name to toast this morning: Lord Razzall. Together with his Lib Dem colleague, the party's spokesperson for Culture, Media and Sport Lord Clement Jones, Razzall has tabled an amendment (No.76) to the Digital Economy Bill that gives serial infringers a bit of leeway.
Well, quite a lot of leeway.
The amendment suggests action should be taken only after "the internet service provider has received fifty or more copyright infringement reports about the relevant subscriber from the copyright owner for that period."
So it's not three strikes, but fifty strikes, before you're out. Or, "fifty free download sessions". Which come to think of it, almost sounds like a business plan. It's certainly closer to a business plan than anything official we've seen for months; the music business is keener applying the thumbscrews than fulfilling its part of the bargain to come up with new music services.
Last year, labels killed the world's first licensed P2P file sharing network (Virgin) and one label is stalling on an unlimited downloads service, again with Virgin.
I'd pay for that bundle of fifty sessions. Wouldn't you?
Both extremes of the copyright debate seem determined to show us that they're as deranged as each other. Last week, we revealed the BPI wanted to introduce a no-questions-asked takedown regime similar to the US DMCA - only with no "safe harbour" provisions. It would have allowed rights holders to remove large chunks of published material at a stroke. Very handy if you're allergic to devising new business plans.
At 8pm last night, the Lordships were again working their way through the hundreds of amendments appended to the Digital Economy legislation (the "Mandy Bill"). We'll bring you the highlights shortly. ®
COMMENTS
No, no, no, no, no.
It still misses the fundamental point. Just because someone makes a claim, it does not make it fact if they repeat it n number of times.
If the copyright holders are so sure of themselves, take people to court for breach of copyright, the way they currently can under current legislation.
Any law which puts hear-say as evidence (you know, just like the eCRB does, thanks LieBore) is not a viable law. Any law which removes the right of Habeas Corpus (equally, like all the fines for littering, anti-social behaviour and so on, thanks LieBore), which has been enshrined in law since the Magna Carta, should not get through parliament (assuming MP's "work for you").
This government is full of so much fail it's quite unbelievable.
Another reason
There is also another reason why we should vote LibDems. To balance the parliament so no one party can pass any laws they want. If law gets stuck on discussion stage, newspapers are more likely to pick it up and trigger national discussion. That can only be a good thing.
And...
.... Yet another reason I'll be continuing to vote Lib Dem...
As if trying to stop Scheming Dave and His Lordship of Darkness from getting / maintaining power wasn't enough...
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
