RSS
UK ISPs: Unfair Consumers Must Pay to Protect Entertainment Industry Profits

UK ISPs: Unfair Consumers Must Pay to Protect Entertainment Industry Profits

TalkTalk says it’s “absolutely outrageous” that the UK’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has decided to require ISPs to pay 25% of the costs of the costs of enforcing the Digital Economy Act‘s measures to tackle online copyright infringement. Points out the unfairness of forcing ISPs, and in effect their customers, to pay the costs of the music and film industries efforts to enforce their own copyright.

Earlier I mentioned how the UK’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has decided on a cost breakdown for enforcing the Digital Economy Act‘s measures to tackle online copyright infringement, which according to it, will be split between rights holders and ISPs at a ratio of 75:25 respectively.

The govt’s Minister for Communications, Ed Vaizey, says the decision on costs is “proportionate to everyone involved,” but many disagree with that sentiment because it belies the fact that others will be forced to pay the costs of protecting the outdated business models of the entertainment industry.

In fact, Andrew Heaney, Director of Strategy and Regulation for UK ISP TalkTalk, calls the decision “absolutely outrageous.”

“In effect, ISPs and their customers will be forced to pay for the costs of the music and film industries to enforce their own copyright,” he says. “To us this is manifestly unfair. It is the rightsholders’ material; if they think it is being accessed illegally, it is only right that they should be the ones to pay for protecting it.”

And he’s right. The 25% will be passed along to consumers who will in effect be subsidizing the entertainment industry’s efforts to extract as much money from consumers as possible.

Other ISPs are also saddened by the decision.

“Whilst I understand the logic in trying to ensure that the costs are minimised[,] I wonder if there is somewhere in European Law relating to government subsidies of industry – because that is effectively what is being done here,” says Trefor Davies, Chief Technology Officer of Timico UK. “The Government is indirectly subsidizing the Creative industry by taxing the internet industry and giving the taxes to Rights Holders.”

A number of consumer groups are also angry with the decision and the substantive unfairness of it all.

“Consumers should not be picking up the tab for the enforcement of copyright laws that will benefit the music industry to the tune of millions,” says Robert Hammond, Head of Post and Digital Communications at Consumer Focus, a UK consumer advocacy group. “The previous government admitted any extra cost on ISPs may push up the cost of broadband, making it unaffordable for thousands of vulnerable consumers who need internet access to get vital services and cheaper deals.”

This is brings up a good point. If the cost of Internet service is already barely affordable for some, this added tax for enforcing the DEA will surely push it out of reach. According to the Open Rights Group, a UK-based digital rights advocacy group, by the Government’s own estimates the tax will mean up to 96,000 individuals won’t able to afford an internet connection anymore.

The Open Rights Group also makes the more poignant argument that it will mean up to £500m ($775m USD) will be extracted from economy and poured into a silly system of notifications and appeals without any likelihood of public benefit.

“This is ludicrous given that we are in a recession,” it says. “Rightsholders would be better off investing that money into setting up new online content services.”

More importantly, the music industry has already said that it’s total revenue was up 4.7% in 2008 as well as up 2.3% in 2009. If this is the case is it really necessary to create such an expensive experiment with peoples’ money?

I guess for copyright holders the answer is yes. Too bad UK politicians can’t seem to be able to say no.

Stay tuned.

[email protected]



Jared Moya
I've been interested in P2P since the early, high-flying days of Napster and KaZaA. I believe that analog copyright laws are ill-suited to the digital age, and that art and culture shouldn't be subject to the whims of international entertainment industry conglomerates. Twitter | Google Plus
TerribleTony
TerribleTony

Ok, go ahead Government, do it. This will mean that I can legitimately download anything I want, because I will have paid for it. Not that I want any of the crap they produce, but if I'm paying, I'm taking.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Well ... are the copyright holders willing to pay 25% of their income from those rights to the ISPs and customers? If they don't want to share the profits, why do they expect to be allowed to share the costs?

asdf
asdf

You british, are becoming more and more and more stupid along the time ... what a govern of idiots ...

Anon1
Anon1

asdf you stink of sh*t and god knows wot forsaken place uve been dragged up in, thats like saying many different country's citizens are stupid because they have idiots for a goverment? why did you even waste yours and everyones time coming on this site and publishing your short and idiotic comment lol. I feel sorry for the country you come from. Having you as a citizen must certainly rank them low on respectful countries.

yomismo
yomismo

they are getting what they wanted, arent they?

JT
JT

How does one go about trying to convince people that for the first 25% of any given year (or maybe each month - 1st week each month?), no one should buy a CD, a book, a DVD, nor go to the cinema. Obviously most people wouldn't do this, but if even only a relatively small group did, first week of each month, then I imagine there would be a distinct impact...

Infernoz
Infernoz

@asdf You appear to be a stupid troll, and full of **it! I never voted for the latest bunch of apparent wasters, because I comprehended that all politicians are ultimately pawned by corporations, thus democracy appears to be a delusion of representation, foisted on us by the powers that be. Nationality seems just another delusion foisted on people, to get undue respect and pillage for anther delusion called the state, within arbitrary borders of a country or region, again by the powers that be.

Fido
Fido

Hmm ... does this mean that we get 25% of all their revenues too? Do we get 25% of the payout from any cases that are won? Do we in fact get anything for this, other than unhappy customers and yet another tax on broadband usage in the UK?

tomfloppy
tomfloppy

if we're now going to have to pay for it we may as well start downloading the stuff and get our moneys worth. www.torrentz.com is a good place to start.

anon
anon

The worst part is that people will be basically paying for litigation against themselves.

Frank MacDonald
Frank MacDonald

Good article. Been following this trend for a while. Somewhat bleak outlook to say the least. Frank.

Drew Wilson
Drew Wilson

I think this certainly contributes to a growing body of evidence that government intervention on behalf of the record labels is not a good idea. I think that the record labels have every right to resist the digital revolution. Fine. Just die already then. Resisting progress is not an excuse to have money and regulation being fed intravenously into the industries arm. The industry needs to decide, does it want to actually be a part of the future or does it not? If it doesn't, then just keep selling your LPs and CDs until the sales dry up when their audience finally chooses to move along with progress. If it wants to be a part of the present, then invest time and money in to how they can market their music in the digital environment. What the industry is trying to do is have it both ways and say, "I don't want my business model to die as a result of my decisions." For having the attitude, I just hope this industry dies so meaningful progress can be made in music. It's stupid that we have put up with this for as long as we have.

Owned
Owned

Everyone knows governments are easily bought, im not shocked at all, they want the internet gone, mafiaa couldnt b happier than to make internet too expensive for anyone







VyprVPN Personal VPN lets you browse securely