Copyright Law

UK Bill Would Force ISPs to Block P2P Websites

By Jared Moya

Proposed amendment to the Digital Economy Bill threatens ISPs to “to prevent access to online locations specified in the order of the Court for the prevention of online copyright infringement,” but doesn’t require a verification process, resulting in a “serious chilling effect as ISP’s play (it) safe.”

Conservative Lord Howard and Liberal Democrat Lord Clement Jones have proposed an amendment to the Digital Economy Bill that would cause a huge shift in the way ISPs are asked to deal with copyright infringement on their networks.

Amendment 120a would give courts the power to “prevent access to specified online locations for the prevention of online copyright infringement” with the threat of “injunctions” against those ISPs that have “actual knowledge of another person using their service to infringe copyright,” but has failed to “prevent copyright infringement content being accessed at or via that online location or taken reasonable steps to remove copyright infringing content from that online location (or both).”

What it doesn’t spell out is exactly how ISPs are supposed to verify claims of copyright infringement (a new ISP detective bureau?) or the means of appeal. Some site operators may be falsely accused of copyright infringement and subsequently erroneously sanctioned by their ISP.

“There will be a serious chilling effect as ISP’s play safe,” observes Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Right Group, a UK-based digital advocacy group.

The amendment also contains no requirements that site operators be notified prior to a copyright holder’s application for an injunction against their site. The only “notification” they get is by taking “reasonable steps” to prevent or remove copyright infringing content.

However, what if they are unaware of the infringing content? There’s no mechanism for them to make their case or even appeal the findings.

“This would open the door to a massive imbalance of power in favor of large copyright holding companies,” adds Killock. “Individuals and small businesses would be open to massive ‘copyright attacks’ that could shut them down, just by the threat of action.”

“This is exactly how libel law works today: suppressing free speech by the unwarranted threat of legal action. The expense and the threat are enough to create a ‘chilling effect’.”

What’s also left out from the amendment is mention of sanctions against those site operators actually accused of the copyright infringement in the first place. Sure they face having their site’s blocked, but if they’re are the real targets why is that ISPs are the ones facing the sanctions?

The news follows previous reports from a few days ago in which the govt plans to outlaw open Wi-Fi connections, another draconian measure in desperate effort to protect corporate profits.

Stay tuned.

jared@zeropaid.com

Full post as published by ZeroPaid on March 03, 2010 (boomark / email).