Kitsimons

Journal Feed

It strikes me as ironic that given the amount of serious crime (conceivably) perpetrated across, or with the aid of, the Internet on a daily basis, it is the act of downloading pirated material that has prompted the UK government to propose this legislation. That's right, the safety of the UK populous is best served by first and foremost tackling the grievous crime of downloading pirated music or movies. The government is acting in the public interest. The government couldn't possibly have been motivated by pressure from the record or film industry, now could it?

All joking aside, legislation forcing ISPs to monitor activity of any nature over their networks sets a very dangerous precedent. ISPs, just like traditional telecoms firms, merely provide a conduit for data. Providers of such a service have never been considered responsible, nor required to be responsible, for the actions of those using their service.

Consider, for example, the absurdity of holding British Telecom culpable for a bank robbery planned and orchestrated using its phone network. Or indeed requiring British Telecom to police its own network, monitoring for any such illegal activities and then moving to take steps against criminals committing said illegal acts. It is precisely this kind of self-policing that would be required of ISPs under the proposed UK government legislation.

The most disturbing question, aside from why lobbying from big business has prompted this move from the government, pertains to scope. More precisely, could it subsequently be challenged that an ISP should monitor its network for evidence of all kinds of criminal acts? If an ISP is required to take action against illegal downloaders, then why not other criminals using their network? Like I said, it's a potential Pandora's box.

There are clearly many other worrying aspects of the proposed legislation. One that springs to mind is the concern over who will be prosecuted. What happens if it isn't the account owner illegally downloading material? Relentless litigation by the RIAA has already shown the complexities of trying to tie a computers' IP address to an individual. Even in the event of being able to ascertain that illegal downloading occurred on a specific computer, it is often impossible to say who was using the computer at the time. Should a grandmother be penalised for the actions of her grandchildren? Or someone who unwittingly had their machine hijacked by a malicious program?

Any purported benefits of the proposed legislation are heavily outweighed by the negative aspects. It sets a dangerous precedent in what is legally required of ISPs, has huge implications with regards to privacy and is by no means an effective mechanism for determining guilt, in what can only be described as a lesser crime in the grand scheme of things.

The proposed legislation is certainly not in the public interest. It is, however, in the interest of certain big business lobby groups. That, of course, is what this is all about.