Don’t get me wrong ..I am opposed to file sharing. However, access to the Internet is a fundamental right .. and the French three strikes proposal was rightly rejected by the EU since the Internet is a fundamental right ..
Stephen Timms, minister for Digital Britain, explained the change of heart. as per the BBC
“We’ve been listening carefully to responses to the consultation this far, and it’s become clear there are widespread concerns that the plans as they stand could delay action, impacting unfairly upon rights holders,” he said.
While it’s interesting to see that our government listens to people .. who has the time to respond to such ‘consultations’ in a recession? I would say – mostly lobbyists!
I don’t recollect a ‘consultation for the Iraq war?’ – i.e.governments ‘listen’ only when they choose to .. or they are ‘encouraged’ to by lobbyists ..
Again .. I am not pro file sharing .. But legislation like this will alienate even the moderates like me. It will achieve nothing ..
And I do see it as a breach of human rights ..
Let’s put it this way .. A person is poor .. they can’t pay their water bills. Their landlord chucks them out .. this happens again .. and again .. making the person a repeat offender for the water companies ..
So, now .. should we create laws to prevent this person from drinking water?
The government’s new proposals come just days after Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, met David Geffen, the founder of Asylum Records and the man who set up DreamWorks with Steven Spielberg, at a private dinner when on holiday in Corfu.
Lord Mandelson is keen to adopt a tougher approach to internet piracy, estimated to cost the movie industry alone around £1.4 billion a year.
Seven million people – one in 12 of the population – regularly download music and films illicitly.
A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said there was no discussion of online piracy when Lord Mandelson met Geffen and there is no connection between that meeting and the Government’s new proposals on illegal filesharing.
I find that last statement hard to believe .. and I wonder how a government department spokesman can issue such a categorical statement on the contents of a private dinner on holiday .. I mean how can they prove one way or the other?