[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 10:19 +0100, Dan Dart wrote: > What was the message you sent? Have you already sent it to the list? No but I think everyone will write their own and most likely to a better job than I did. Here it is FWIW Dear Andrew I want to put in a plea that the Digital Economy Act be repealed. The thing is framed to protect the outdated business models of the entertainment industry. It is unjust and will require all of us to pay. In any case, the industry exaggerates the problem - digital media of all kinds have incresed in sales steadily - most of the increase going to games. Music downloads are cheap or free from suppliers who have adapted to the Internet - unlike the big players. In the same context, given that the industry claims to be protecting artists, it is interesting that there is a class action in Canada against all the big players for not paying artists' royalties for a decade or more. Quotng some comments: TalkTalk says itâs âabsolutely outrageousâ that the UKâs Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has decided to require ISPs to pay 25% of the costs of the costs of enforcing the Digital Economy Actâs measures to tackle online copyright infringement. Points out the unfairness of forcing ISPs, and in effect their customers, to pay the costs of the music and film industries efforts to enforce their own copyright. The govtâs Minister for Communications, Ed Vaizey, says the decision on costs is âproportionate to everyone involved,â but many disagree with that sentiment because it belies the fact that others will be forced to pay the costs of protecting the outdated business models of the entertainment industry. âIn effect, ISPs and their customers will be forced to pay for the costs of the music and film industries to enforce their own copyright,â he says. âTo us this is manifestly unfair. It is the rightsholdersâ material; if they think it is being accessed illegally, it is only right that they should be the ones to pay for protecting it.â And heâs right. The 25% will be passed along to consumers who will in effect be subsidizing the entertainment industryâs efforts to extract as much money from consumers as possible. âWhilst I understand the logic in trying to ensure that the costs are minimised[,] I wonder if there is somewhere in European Law relating to government subsidies of industry â because that is effectively what is being done here,â says Trefor Davies, Chief Technology Officer of Timico UK. âThe Government is indirectly subsidizing the Creative industry by taxing the internet industry and giving the taxes to Rights Holders.â A number of consumer groups are also angry with the decision and the substantive unfairness of it all. âConsumers should not be picking up the tab for the enforcement of copyright laws that will benefit the music industry to the tune of millions,â says Robert Hammond, Head of Post and Digital Communications at Consumer Focus, a UK consumer advocacy group. âThe previous government admitted any extra cost on ISPs may push up the cost of broadband, making it unaffordable for thousands of vulnerable consumers who need internet access to get vital services and cheaper deals.â This is brings up a good point. If the cost of Internet service is already barely affordable for some, this added tax for enforcing the DEA will surely push it out of reach. According to the Open Rights Group, a UK-based digital rights advocacy group, by the Governmentâs own estimates the tax will mean up to 96,000 individuals wonât able to afford an internet connection anymore. The Open Rights Group also makes the more poignant argument that it will mean up to Â500m ($775m USD) will be extracted from economy and poured into a silly system of notifications and appeals without any likelihood of public benefit. âThis is ludicrous given that we are in a recession,â it says. âRightsholders would be better off investing that money into setting up new online content services.â More importantly, the music industry has already said that itâs total revenue was up 4.7% in 2008 as well as up 2.3% in 2009. If this is the case is it really necessary to create such an expensive experiment with peoplesâ money? James -- james kilty http://www.kilty.demon.co.uk -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq