Music Ally

The UK’s Digital Economy Bill is a step closer to becoming law, as it was passed last night by the House of Lords. However, confusion still surrounds an amendment giving the high court the power to order ISPs to block websites accused of copyright infringement.

The government says it will correct the bill’s flaws during the ‘wash-up’ process in the House of Commons, but critics say it’s being hurried into law before the upcoming General Election.

“Our elected MPs will have spent a whole two hours on this bill… before they disappear back to constituencies to ask for our vote,” says Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group. “Meanwhile, a ‘rump parliament’ made up of retiring MPs and party whips will pass disconnection measures – with no actual debate.”

(more…)

Controversial amendment 120A in the UK’s Digital Economy Bill – the one that would allow rightsowners to demand that infringing websites be blocked by ISPs – is being further modified in response to fierce criticism from the internet industry.

The revised version would require copyright owners to pay legal costs and compensation for such requests, and also to inform site owners before requesting a block, with a list of infringing works. Sites would also be able to appeal against being blocked.

Equally controversially, Billboard says that the original amendment is “almost identical” to a draft written by the BPI – implying that it was cut’n'pasted into the amendment by Liberal Democrat peer Lord Clement-Jones.

The bill has faced strenuous lobbying from both sides of the debate – ISPs and the music industry. The question now is whether it will have time to become legislation before the UK’s upcoming General Election, and what kind of shape it will be in by that point after the barrage of recent amendments.

There’s more controversy around the Digital Economy Bill today, focused around the impact of an amendment by two Liberal Democrat peers on cloud storage services. The amendment was targeted at sites like Rapidshare that are facilitating piracy outside the traditional P2P networks.

“Around 35% of all online copyright infringement takes place on non peer-to-peer sites and services,” noted one of the peers, Clement Jones. But – and this is a big but – there could be severe implications for sites offering cloud storage of any kind – including startups looking at allowing people to upload their music collections to the cloud and listen to them from any device.

The concern is over whether politicians can draft legislation that cracks down on piracy while not hampering legal fair-use services. And specifically whether politicians can do it in a hurry – they’re trying to get the Digital Economy Bill through before the upcoming UK General Election – while being bombarded from all sides by lobbyists.

The race to get the UK government’s Digital Economy Bill into law before the country’s general election this Spring has been hit by another ministerial departure.

Creative industries minister Sion Simon is stepping down to stand for election as Mayor of Birmingham – and he was the minister tasked with guiding the legislation through parliament. No replacement has yet been confirmed, but the opposition Conservative Party – who aren’t expected to back the bill if they win the election – has slammed the news.

“This resignation is another chapter in the sorry story of Labour’s disastrous approach to Britain’s digital future,” shadow culture secretary Jeremy Hunt tells the Guardian. “It is a complete farce that a minister responsible should resign his post so close to the digital economy bill arriving in the House of Commons.”

The BPI has tabled amendments to the UK government’s Digital Economy bill that would introduce US-style DMCA takedown rights, but with no ’safe harbour’ clause, according to The Register. It’s seen documents covering the introduction of a new clause, Section 97B, which it says “would be granted when an ISP had refused to take down infringing material”.

The measures would replace the current bill’s Clause 17, and the BPI has said in a statement: “In light of the ongoing debate on the current draft of Clause 17, we thought it prudent to propose possible alternative approaches, including a straw-man s.97B. However, Clause 17 remains our favoured approach to address forms of online infringement other than P2P filesharing.”

This and other amendments to the bill tabled by supporters of the ISPs are currently being debated in the House of Lords.

We knew that ISPs weren’t too keen on the clause in the UK government’s Digital Economy bill that allows ministers to change UK copyright law without primary legislation. But now four of the biggest web companies have joined the battle.

Google, Yahoo, Facebook and eBay have written to business secretary Lord Mandelson expressing “grave concerns” at the bill. “The industry as a whole had hoped that the outcome of Digital Britain would be a clear, workable set of principles by which the industry could operate,” says the letter.

“On the contrary, Clause 17 creates uncertainty for consumers and businesses and puts at risk the UK’s leading position in a digital Europe… This clause is so wide that it could put at risk legitimate consumer use of current technology as well as future developments”.