Comments on: The Digital Economy Bill: Be Careful What You Wish For

By: If people use your creations to have conversations, you win at culture. | I Am Pete Ashton

Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:48:22 +0000

[...] a bloody mess and no mistake, but I don’t want to talk about it in depth as others have done a much better job. Seriously, go read that post. It’s lucid and non-ranty and [...]

By: Copyright law must be simplified | Richard Hartley

[...] are quoting losses of hundreds of millions of pounds, based on the deeply flawed assumption that every download is a lost sale, and that is assuming they're able to know how many illegal downloads are really happening. [...]

By: Hi, i'm Eliot Fineberg · Up with this kind of thing.

Hi, i'm Eliot Fineberg · Up with this kind of thing. — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:54:40 +0000

[...] reading a lot of JP Rangaswami’s blogposts of late. I have been taken by how powerfully hedissected and discussed the situation surrounding the Digital Economy Bill/Act without ever reverting to name calling, slagging off and over simplification. I’ve decided [...]

By: Hi, i'm Eliot Fineberg · Up with thing kind of thing.

Hi, i'm Eliot Fineberg · Up with thing kind of thing. — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:56:04 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Ray Boggiano

Ray Boggiano — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:50:04 +0000

A great article!

The DEB is ridiculously flawed. The negative repercussions on our society and economy as a whole hugely outweigh any potential gains from combating piracy in this way. It’s an insult to democracy by being so blatantly written and pushed through by lobbyists from the BPI and other “music industry” figures. It ignored the British judiciary system by assuming guilt in the absence of proof (IP addresses cannot prove guilt in a court of law). It jeopardises our young digital economy, by eroding the chances of gaining truly wireless cities, and removes any incentive to provide free wi-fi areas.

What’s more, it is unlikely to have any effect on file-sharing, as is evident when you look at Sweden as a case study, where file-sharing has risen since their anti-piracy laws, just now it is encrypted. Instead the record companies who wrote this Act should be focusing on live music promotion as their primary revenue stream rather than protecting an old, out-dated business model.

For my blog on the implications of the DEB please go to http://bit.ly/a5rnUk. Cheers.

By: Darkman

Darkman — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:43:20 +0000

Why not just put encryption on my eyes and ears and charge me every time I use them !! lets get real here, 98% of what I download is utter crap, there’s no way in this world that I would pay £20 for most of the movies I watch, nor would I pay £12 for most of the music albums I have downloaded….. But i would have paid a small fee. at the end of the day we should get VALUE for money. make media VALUE for money and I will pay!!, that way if i purchase something that is rubbish I am not left feeling like I have just been ripped off, which may i add has happened many a time after paying an extortionate amount to go see some over hyped crap at the local cinema !

By: The silent spring of the internet: cyberspace needs its stewards – confused of calcutta

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:34:56 +0000

[...] may be assumed almost at will. All to try and hold on to a dying business model. There will be consequences, unexpected consequences. [For those of you who are interested, I wrote about the data here, here [...]

By: What next for the Digital Economy Bill? Implications for digital content producers

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:50:15 +0000

[...] into a market, e.g. in emerging economies where people aren’t yet in a position to pay. Confused of Calcutta makes some well argued points on the digital economy bill in relation to [...]

By: JP

JP — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 17:46:59 +0000

@Paul *all* intellectual property rights need state intervention in order to merely exist. unlike other rights, they cannot be “enforced” any other way. wherever the enforcing of such rights contradicts other, more basic rights, I would push back against the technique used to enforce the right.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 12:59:16 +0000

“In this context, the actions of the music industry at this time, particularly in the context of the Digital Economy Bill, seem foolhardy in the extreme.”

Perhaps they just want to enforce copyright online? It’s their right to do so, after all.

We all agree the music business should be doing more, and if it had launched licensed Spotify and Napster service it would not be where it is today. But are you seriously suggesting online music copyright cannot be enforced, and therefore should not be?

That undermines your entire argument.