Feeds

BT wary of rights holders' site-blocking proposal

Go fly a kitemark

Next gen security for virtualised datacentres

The confidential series of digital economy meetings chaired by Culture secretary Ed Vaizey are a bit less confidential after the leak of a proposal put together by copyright holders. Vaizey wants internet companies and copyright groups to thrash out their differences.

The most recent of the meetings last week saw a site-blocking plan tabled for discussion. The proposal was created at Vaizey's request for a voluntary, self-regulatory alternative that would replace sections of the Digital Economy Act.

The proposal is intended to restrict access to sites that are "substantially focused upon infringement of copyright". Rights holders say "attractive" legal offerings should be available and that the proposal is not aimed at "casual infringement, but at those sites, proportionality few in number, which focus on infringement."

The plan sees an "Expert Body" to decide on the sites, and implement the code. Once earmarked, proposals to restrict access would be handled by the Applications Court of the High Court, and require judicial consent, but allows cases to be heard within days rather than months. Compliant ISPs might receive a "kitemark".

"The evidence would need to be sufficient to satisfy any expert body (and subsequently the Court) that the target site taken as a whole substantially focuses on infringement and has failed to take available action to remedy the situation in response to a notice."

BT was understood to object strongly to the plan, we gather. Vaizey doesn't necessarily back a censorship solution, but is getting fed up with the lack of constructive engagement from ISPs. He was reportedly unimpressed by BT's response.

It may be considered an opening gambit. Other kites flown include pop-ups and "traffic lights", rather than outright blocking, as we discussed here.

Copyright spartists the Open Rights Group are miffed that they are not invited to the Vaizey-chaired sessions, and published the proposal on their website. (Lib Dem James Firth also got a copy, and was first to spill the beans).

The quango Consumer Focus attended the sessions for the first time last week. ®

Related Link

ORG

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
And now a message from our sponsors: 'STFU or else'
Top beak: UK privacy law may be reconsidered because of social media
Rise of Twitter etc creates 'enormous challenges'
Uber, Lyft and cutting corners: The true face of the Sharing Economy
Casual labour and tired ideas = not really web-tastic
Ex US cybersecurity czar guilty in child sex abuse website case
Health and Human Services IT security chief headed online to share vile images
Don't even THINK about copyright violation, says Indian state
Pre-emptive arrest for pirates in Karnataka
The police are WRONG: Watching YouTube videos is NOT illegal
And our man Corfield is pretty bloody cross about it
Oz biz regulator discovers shared servers in EPIC FACEPALM
'Not aware' that one IP can hold more than one Website
prev story

Whitepapers

Gartner critical capabilities for enterprise endpoint backup
Learn why inSync received the highest overall rating from Druva and is the top choice for the mobile workforce.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Consolidation: The Foundation for IT Business Transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.