UK Govt: ISPs Must Pay 25% of Costs to Protect Copyright Holders

[nsane.forums]

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills determines that the costs for enforcing the Digital Economy Act's measures to fight online copyright infringement will be split between rights holders and ISPs at a ratio of 75:25 respectively. The 25% for ISPs is important because the cost will likely be passed along to consumers on their monthly bills.

The war against illegal file-sharing in the UK just got a but more personal for some with news that the country'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.

According to the BIS, the split between rights holders and ISPs will be at a ratio of 75:25 respectively.

The costs sharing decision applies to both the notification and appeals process, i.e. the infringement warning letters and the possible challenge by an individual of the allegations.

As for appeals, the BIS has been kind enough to decide that "no fee will be charged to consumers who want to appeal a notification," so at least the innocent won't have to pay up fight false accusations. However, the BIS does mention a caveat: "a free system risks the possibility of large numbers of unnecessary appeals, the Government will monitor the situation closely, and reserves the right to introduce a small fee at a later stage."

So the falsely accused could be forced to pay for the right to defend themselves in the future.

"Protecting our valuable creative industries, which have already suffered significant losses as a result of people sharing digital content without paying for it, is at the heart of these measures," says the Minister for Communications, Ed Vaizey, in announcing the decision. "The Digital Economy Act serves to reduce online copyright infringement through a fair and robust process and at the same time provides breathing space to develop better business models for consumers who buy music, films and books online. We expect the measures will benefit our creative economy by some £200m per year and as rights holders are the main beneficiaries of the system, we believe our decision on costs is proportionate to everyone involved."

The problem is that the costs are not "proportionate" in logical terms. The govt decided that ISPs will be forced to pay 25%, but realistically it's the public that's being forced to pay. The money has to come from somewhere, and ISPs will simply pass along that 25% to their customers in the form of higher monthly subscription bills.

This means a good portion of the cost of "protecting" copyright holders will be borne by the public that's shunning their outdated business model in the first place. Talk about irony. And the funny thing is it still won't force the music industry to create the kind of digital music services people are looking for.

View: Original Article

[NoYB]

Total unfair and bias BS :protest: :rant: :mad2: