IP: A New Definition

This has been going the rounds but I got it from @keithbelfast. It’s a letter from The Right Honourable Stephen Timms, MP, one of the masterminds behind the Digital Economy Bill. Some select quotes about Stephen Timms from his biographical entry on Wikipedia: Timms is currently the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. He is also … Continue reading “IP: A New Definition”

This has been going the rounds but I got it from @keithbelfast. It’s a letter from The Right Honourable Stephen Timms, MP, one of the masterminds behind the Digital Economy Bill.

Some select quotes about Stephen Timms from his biographical entry on Wikipedia:

Timms is currently the Financial Secretary to the Treasury.
He is also the Vice-Chair of the Labour Party, with particular responsibility for faith groups.
Timms worked in the telecommunications industry for 15 years; he was the manager responsible for producing reports on the future of telecommunications.
In August 2009, he was given additional responsibility for “Digital Britain

Which of course, makes all of this even more tragic.

StephenTimms

Upset the Apple cart

André Torrez writes why he will buy an iPad this weekend: “If VHS home recording is made legal then our industry is ruined.” “If CD quality music is allowed to be sold then our industry is ruined.” “If DAT is made legal then our industry is ruined.” “If the Rio PMP3000 is allowed to be … Continue reading “Upset the Apple cart”

André Torrez writes why he will buy an iPad this weekend:

“If VHS home recording is made legal then our industry is ruined.”
“If CD quality music is allowed to be sold then our industry is ruined.”
“If DAT is made legal then our industry is ruined.”
“If the Rio PMP3000 is allowed to be sold then our industry is ruined.”
“If file sharing is permitted then our industry is ruined.”

The tactic is as old as the hills and used by some pretty dishonest people in the last few years to combat technology they feared would upset the nice apple cart they’d set up.

I don’t think this is justification enough to buy an iPad but it is justification for citizens of the United Kingdom to oppose the Digital Economy Bill. I support copyright, of course I do, but copyright is a human invention and the acceleration of human innovation is now hidebound by laws enacted when technology was in its infancy. Corporate interests now keep our writers’ works bound in law for 75 years after their death even when they have no descendants (I have a personal bet that copyright laws will be extended again in the UK before the end of 2012 – mark my words!). Wake up people – we’re being robbed of our heritage. In the olden days, we were DRM-free. We easily copied materials between us and making a living as an artist was fraught with peril. Copyright was introduced to help that and it helps artists make a living even when their creations are copied. But there has to be a sensible limit – it’s not meant to be in perpetuity. When you create something, when you have a performance, it’s not meant to secure an income for the entire length of your life and the length of life of your descendants. Let them create something too! Copyright, designed to protect the incomes of artists, ends up stifling artists because they lose one of their incentives to create, put simply: hunger

Here in the UK, we’re going to be paying 50 pence a month additional tax to fund an initiative which will put 2 Mbps broadband into every home in the nation. While I applaud the plan, I have grave concerns over how it has been thought through. Supplying broadband is part of the puzzle – what about the hardware to run it on? What about the electricity to power it? Will this empower or destroy smaller internet service providers?

But more importantly – what are the social implications of this. Just as there are naysayers who don’t think the iPad is a viable (let alone well executed) device and cannot see past their blinkers on what their definition of a mobile computing device is, there are similar limitations on what is possible with broadband for all. Will this broadband be delivered by a provider who gives set-top boxes to everyone which run a cut down thin client? Will the browser included be standards compliant? (I was present at a recent presentation to Belfast City Council where a solution was being offered for set-top boxes which would put everyone’s browser a version behind the current, control access to Facebook and Youtube, force Council-related advertising and was prepared to offer “Secure by Design, because it’s Ethernet”. Now, as a once-techie I have no fucking idea what that last bullet point was meant to mean but to be honest I’d already switched off from the presentation long before that porky-pie and considered it a very bad idea.

There is no way that the UK is ready for a 100% broadband uptake either in terms of social capability or technical ability. We need more than just lines into houses – we need social reform, we need the government to take charge and not be so lily-livered about “new” media. We need them to open their doors and allow complete transparency. Then, after all of that, maybe then we’ll be ready for everyone to be online.

The Digital Economy Bill

The Petition: This petition has been set up in response to the Government’s proposal to cut off internet access to those who are caught illegally downloading copyrighted files. We think this has one fundamental flaw, as illegal filesharers will simply hack into other peoples WiFi networks to do their dirty work. This will result in … Continue reading “The Digital Economy Bill”

The Petition:

This petition has been set up in response to the Government’s proposal to cut off internet access to those who are caught illegally downloading copyrighted files. We think this has one fundamental flaw, as illegal filesharers will simply hack into other peoples WiFi networks to do their dirty work. This will result in innocent people being disconnected from the internet. What’s more, such a punishment should be dealt with in the proper way, in a court of law. This guilty until proven innocent approach violates basic human rights.

Sign the Petition

It’s a simple question:

Does this Bill support the little guy?

If it does, then by all means, it should be supported. If it does not, then it is unsuitable and should be returned.

The little guy is the small business creating content or software. Nothing I have read in the Digital Economy Bill protects or assists the small business content creator. Everything I have read goes into protecting the interests of large content aggregation companies.

The current regime, of which this Bill will enhance and extend, proscribes “unlimited” fines and jail terms for filesharing. These fines do not go to the copyright owners but instead go to further prop up an industry which is finding itself undermined by the copyright owners and creators themselves. Small businesses are currently giving their content away in order to be noticed – this Bill is not concerned with small businesses, it is not concerned with enterprise.

One thing is definite however – this Bill has empassioned professionals within the industry to speak out against the Bill in its current form – most visibly Stephen Fry but also Mark Harding, Intellectual Property Director for KPMG and a plethora of other names, big and small.

Personally I think the focus on policing rather than enterprise is utterly abhorrent, the measures rushed and ultimately damaging to the UK economy. I also refute the concept that small businesses are truly suffering ‘because of filesharing’ and more than ‘home taping’ hurt them in the 70s.

We break UK copyright law every time we rip a CD to our computers and then again when we transfer to our iPods. Our copyright laws are woefully out of date and this grants sweeping powers for copyright infringement whether the individual concerned us aware of the infringement or not. Who is to say that you have permission to copy the text here for any purposes? But your computer has already cached my content which is, technically, a breach of my copyright. And if my web site started to play copyrighted music? You are now guilty of that as well.

I am not defending anyone’s right to steal anyone else’s copyright whether that is music, software, video or text. Nor am I saying that this is an area to be ignored in law. The fact remains that with access to a global market and digital duplication being pristine, the cost of reproduction of content is being driven towards zero. This means that a proportionally higher amount of the revenue for digital content should be available to the content creator. This currently is not happening and this Bill does nothing to redress this.

I am, however, saying that this Bill, in it’s current form, is not the correct solution. The provisions are ill-thought-out, the resolutions rushed.