I recently took part in the Open Rights Group’s campaign against disconnection from the internet (which is a major part of the Digital Economy Bill). Today I received the last email back from the candidates I wrote to. My original letters to Martin Horwood (Liberal Democrats) and Mark Coote (Conservatives) are here and here (the letters are identical, only the names at the top differ).
The Liberal Democrat candidate replied first, early on Monday morning. The Conservative candidate replied later, on Tuesday evening. (This may not be very relevant, I just added it for the sake of openness).
The replies are as follows. First the Liberal Democrat candidate:
Dear Anthony,
Thank you for contacting Martin about the Digital Economy Act. The Liberal Democrats voted against the bill, and were not supported by the Conservatives, who abstained on the vote, scuppering any chance of effective opposition to the bill.
We have been highly critical about the so called “wash-up” process which has enabled this Bill to pass with limited Parliamentary scrutiny before the General Election. The “wash-up” of the Digital Economy Bill was essentially a carve up between the Labour and Conservative parties that ignored Liberal Democrat arguments to consult more widely before introducing a measure to introduce web-blocking for copyright infringement. Liberal Democrats voted against the Bill at 3rd Reading in the House of Commons and against the Labour and Conservatives web-blocking amendment in both the Lords and the Commons.
Liberal Democrats remain to be convinced about the necessity for technical measures, which could include disconnection from the internet. Liberal Democrats were successful in getting the Government to agree to a period of at least a year in which no technical measures can be considered and then to undertake a process of rigorous analysis and consultation into the need for any such measures. We also believe that the music, film and other content industries must work more urgently to develop easy and affordable ways for people to legally access their products.
The recent Liberal Democrat conference in March voted to establish a party working group to look into further detail about the issues raised by the Bill.
Nick Clegg has vowed to repeal the Act if the Liberal Democrats are involved in the next government and give the issues proper time and consultation. “We did our best to prevent the Digital Economy Bill being rushed through at the last moment. It badly needed more debate and amendment, and we are extremely worried that it will now lead to completely innocent people having their internet connections cut off,” said Clegg. “It was far too heavily weighted in favour of the big corporations and those who are worried about too much information becoming available. It badly needs to be repealed, and the issues revisited.”
If Martin is re-elected as your MP he will join his Liberal Democrat colleagues in fighting to repeal this Act and allow due consideration for the issues. He would also be interested in attending Eric Joyce’s meeting on this issue in the new parliament.
If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Best wishes,
Victoria White
Martin Horwood’s campaign for Cheltenham
So the Liberal Democrats are against disconnection from the internet, instead preferring that content providers provide better ways of accessing their products. In my opinion, this is the way to go. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should not have to police copyright infringement, as the Digital Economy Bill requires them to (Also, they are not equipped to deal with it, because of things like protocol encryption).
The Conservative candidate’s response is as follows:
Dear Anthony
Thank you for getting in touch about the Digital Economy Act. I certainly share your anger about how the Government rushed through such an important piece of legislation in the dying days of the last Parliament. There was absolutely no reason why they couldn’t have introduced the Bill earlier into the House of Commons, where MPs would then have been able to debate it at length. It just shows the contempt in which they hold both Parliament and the industries affected by this Act.
There can be no doubt that the legislation raised serious questions both for consumers and rights holders. That’s why we took steps to improve and strengthen the legislation in Parliament. Conservatives in the Lords sought to ensure the Bill contained a clear appeals process and robust standards of evidence where allegations of piracy are made. In the Commons, we required the Government to remove inadequate proposals for dealing with orphan works and abandon plans to establish worrying powers to amend copyright law by secondary legislation.
As you know my Party did support many of the measures in this Act. For instance a single age rating system for video games was needed to help parents understand what sort of games are appropriate for their children, and Channel 4 needed an updated remit. Most significantly, something needed to be done to try to reduce online piracy which was estimated to have cost the UK 39,000 jobs in 2008 alone.
We believe that the Act sets up a proportionate and measured response to this problem and that it contains sufficient safeguards through an appeals process and Parliamentary scrutiny for consumers to be protected. It is important to note that only the most serious and consistent offenders will face the threat of disconnection and this will only be done after they have received numerous letters and gone through an appeals process. So although I understand the strength of feeling on this proposal I do not want to rule out temporary disconnection. I will listen to the debates in Parliament and closely follow the drawing up of the codes that will govern this process to make sure that the interests of legitimate users are upheld.
In terms of website blocking I believe that in some circumstances such measures may well be needed. It cannot be right that websites are set up purely to make money by facilitating online piracy. Again though, these proposals will be consulted on and debated in Parliament so I look forward to taking part in that process.
I am also keen to ensure that the copyright system reflects the realities of the modern world. We have repeatedly urged the Government to introduce a ‘format shifting’ exception to decriminalise music listeners who convert legally-owned CDs to other digital formats. This was one of many recommendations in the 2006 Gowers Review which the Labour Government failed to implement.
Ultimately, the UK needs a robust copyright system that provides the right balance of freedom for users and incentives for creators. With the rise of online piracy the Government has clearly failed to maintain that balance, and I believe we have now reached the stage where clear and considered legislation is required.
Although I understand that we may not agree on this issue I am very happy to consider all aspects of this important debate. As such I would be more than happy to attend any meeting on this subject should I be elected on 6th May.
Kind regards
Mark Coote
Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Cheltenham
So the conservatives are in favour of disconnection from the internet, citing job losses. They do not have any response to my statement on businesses providing wifi hotspots, which could easily become very rare if people used them to download copyrighted material. (Note that although the Liberal Democrats did not mention this either, they were against disconnection anyway).
Also, I am unsure if the figure they give for job losses is entirely accurate. The only source I can find stating it is the Sun, and even there it is only mentioned in the title. Something these sort of statistics often do not take account of is that illegal downloads do not necessarily equate to missed sales – people could easily download something for free that they would never consider buying.
On the subject of web blocking, things look the same again. The Liberal Democrats are against it, and the Conservatives are in favour of it.
From a purely technical perspective, web blocking is impossible. It can be easily bypassed by using a proxy in another country (e.g. http://proxy.org/)
From a philosophical perspective, web blocking sounds like a bad idea. Cutting down people’s ability to communicate via the web is an imposition on free speech.
Suffice to say, I know who I would be voting for in this election had my postal vote application not been late.