Rejects demands from the entertainment industry that it begin disconnecting customers suspected of illegal file-sharing.
There’s a war brewing in the UK between ISPs and the music and film industries over demands that they begin disconnecting customers suspected of illegal file-sharing.
A recent press release from TalkTalk, the home phone and broadband company from The Carphone Warehouse and Britain’s 3rd largest ISP, says that it’s refusing to buckle under pressure from the entertainment industry and to “…impinge its customers’ rights and restrict their freedom of use of the internet.”
TalkTalk is the first ISP to reject the British Phonographic Industry’s(BPI) proposed “three-strikes-and-your-out”‘ scheme which would require it to disconnect customers who had been deemed by the music industry body to have shared content with others illegally.
TalkTalk calls the BPI proposals “unreasonable” and “unworkable” and the says it will “…take every practical and legal step to defend its customers.”
Charles Dunstone, CEO, The Carphone Warehouse Group says; ”Our position is very clear, we are the conduit that gives users access to the Internet, we do not control the Internet nor do we control what our users do on the Internet. I cannot foresee any circumstances in which we would voluntarily disconnect a customer’s account on the basis of a third party alleging a wrong doing. We believe that a fundamental part of our role as an ISP is to protect the rights of our users to use the Internet as they choose. We will fight any challenge to the sanctity of this relationship with every legal option available to us.”
The BPI has been writing to all the big ISPs to have them begin warning their customers that file-sharing is not an acceptable activity – and then disconnect those who ignore repeated warnings to stop. However, ISPs like Talk Talk don’t like the idea of playing “internet police” or worse yet, the practice of terminating otherwise loyal, paying customers.
Dunstone was so angry about the letter he received from the BPI, which he says threatened legal action if he didn’t comply with the BPI’s demands within 14 days, that he immediately drew up this press release in response.
“The music industry has consistently failed to adapt to changes in technology and now seeks to foist their problems on someone else,” it continues. “Rather than threatening us, the BPI’s time would be better spent facing up to the reality of our times and adapting its business model accordingly.”
The remark brings up a good point. Why is it that the entire population of a country must begin having its traffic monitored simply to protect the profits of a private business? At what point will people demand that the free, unfettered flow of information is far more important than whether or not the music industry is making a profit?
“TalkTalk has written to the BPI confirming that it will continue to protect its customers and under no circumstances will it voluntarily adopt a scheme that requires it to begin disconnections or sharing customer information with the music industry,” the press release continues.
So what does the BPI have to say? In response, Geoff Taylor, BPI Chief Executive, says that it isn’t asking Talk Talk to become the “internet police,” “impinge customers rights,” or “restrict freedom to use of the internet,” but rather simply to “…act on information we provide to them.”
Isn’t that really the same thing? Or is BPI to be judge and jury and Talk Talk merely the executioner? Whom I ask will ensure that customers get some sort of fair trial at which to argue their case if accused of illegal file-sharing?
He continues:
At the heart of this issue is ensuring that creators are fairly rewarded in the digital age, and we passionately believe that working in partnership with ISPs to develop first class, safe, legal, digital music services is the way forward. But such a partnership can’t succeed if an ISP refuses to do anything to address the problem of illegal downloading on its network.
Talk Talk claims it is their role to “protect the rights of their customers to use the internet as they choose”. We strongly disagree on this point when that usage is illegal, and the government’s position in this area is also clear. We believe that any socially responsible ISP should, as a core part of its business, put in place steps to help their customers avoid engaging in illegal activity, and deter those who knowingly break the law.
We firmly believe in an internet where property rights are respected, and creativity is fairly rewarded. This will grow our digital economy, which is in the interest of all of us. Talk Talk should play its part in building this future.
This last part of the press release is where you can almost smell the hypocrisy and desperation in the air. I mean since when is it an ISP’s duty to partner with outside businesses in order to monitor the data flowing across its network? It smacks of true arrogance on BPI’s part by honestly believing that Talk Talk should be “socially responsible” by invading the privacy of its customers and inspecting their traffic. Such a violation is anything but “socially responsible” unless one lives in a totalitarian state.
So there you have it. The war between ISPs and the entertainment industry is beginning to heat up in the UK and the spoils are essentially user privacy. Hopefully when customers hear that the BPI wants to begin keeping an eye on them for suspicious activity they’ll stand up and voice their anger. It’s never a good idea to “act on information” provided by a private business concerned more with profits than privacy, especially without benefit of a fair trial to properly vet the information it so eagerly offers.
The BPI would really be best served by focusing on the music industry’s need to adapt to the digital age. You’d think it’d be self-evident after years of declining physical CD sales and the ever growing masses of iPod-toting teens.
Dunstone surmises the situation best by observing that “They’re not just shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted – the horse has left town, got married, and started a family.”
Living in San Diego I sadly can’t switch over to Talk Talk, but I do urge those who live in the UK to support it as the first ISP in that country to stand up to the BPI by becoming a new customer.
As they would say across the pond, “Cheers Mr. Dunstone.”
Related Posts
- UK ISPs Surrender, Agree to Fight P2P Piracy
- Norwegian ISP Refuses to Block The Pirate Bay
- IPR Police Uncover 2nd Major P2P Internet Infringement Case in 2006
- Japanese ISPs to Ban File-Sharers from the Internet
- UK ISP: Idea of Stopping File-Sharing is “Very Naive”
Loading ...
The fact this has to be news is kind of depressing and a reflection of the times. What Talk Talk are doing should be commended to the point where this privacy is a basic human right the Data protection Act states a company can hold information as long as it has a purpose and spying on people unless considered high threat terrorists (after a court process) doesn’t come in to play here especially from the ENTERTAINMENT industry. Talk Talk are getting some relatively good publicity and keeping customers with this which means $$$ to them…kudos honestly.
I’m keeping the faith that if it gets too far people really are going to stand up and riot sod the law saying we have to organise them and get permission. This is meant to be a democracy all i see are Tyrants running us who can’t be put to blame because WE are the ones who put them there based on a few weeks of them flirting with us and after spending a night together kicking us to the kerb and going after their own agenda. We have the technology to make spread decisions and supposed education levels where people know what is good for them.
i don’t want a representative i just want someone who asks what we want and then puts it to vote; a few hours extra out of my life a week to make decisions is no skin off my teeth. It would encourage people to actually care about their country. Bless what royalty once meant PRIDE!
According to the BPI as stated above “At the heart of this issue is ensuring that creators are fairly rewarded in the digital age.” If their main concern is ensuring the Artists get rewarded then they should be looking directly at the way funds are allocated from music sales rather than going after ISPs. What they really mean to say is they want to ensure their profits dont drop from not adopting the new media distribution model that consumers want.