UK to appoint "Pirate Finder General" - Jack Sparrow still at large.

Blind_Io

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
24,221
Location
Utah
Car(s)
See signature
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/19/breaking-leaked-uk-g.html

A source close to the British Labour Government has just given me reliable information about the most radical copyright proposal I've ever seen. Secretary of State Peter Mandelson is planning to introduce changes to the Digital Economy Bill now under debate in Parliament. These changes will give the Secretary of State (Mandelson -- or his successor in the next government) the power to make "secondary legislation" (legislation that is passed without debate) to amend the provisions of Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (1988).

What that means is that an unelected official would have the power to do anything without Parliamentary oversight or debate, provided it was done in the name of protecting copyright. Mandelson elaborates on this, giving three reasons for his proposal:

1. The Secretary of State would get the power to create new remedies for online infringements (for example, he could create jail terms for file-sharing, or create a "three-strikes" plan that costs entire families their internet access if any member stands accused of infringement)

2. The Secretary of State would get the power to create procedures to "confer rights" for the purposes of protecting rightsholders from online infringement. (for example, record labels and movie studios can be given investigative and enforcement powers that allow them to compel ISPs, libraries, companies and schools to turn over personal information about Internet users, and to order those companies to disconnect users, remove websites, block URLs, etc)

3. The Secretary of State would get the power to "impose such duties, powers or functions on any person as may be specified in connection with facilitating online infringement" (for example, ISPs could be forced to spy on their users, or to have copyright lawyers examine every piece of user-generated content before it goes live; also, copyright "militias" can be formed with the power to police copyright on the web)

Mandelson is also gunning for sites like YouSendIt and other services that allow you to easily transfer large files back and forth privately (I use YouSendIt to send podcasts back and forth to my sound-editor during production). Like Viacom, he's hoping to force them to turn off any feature that allows users to keep their uploads private, since privacy flags can be used to keep infringing files out of sight of copyright enforcers.

This is as bad as I've ever seen, folks. It's a declaration of war by the entertainment industry and their captured regulators against the principles of free speech, privacy, freedom of assembly, the presumption of innocence, and competition.

This proposal creates the office of Pirate-Finder General, with unlimited power to appoint militias who are above the law, who can pry into every corner of your life, who can disconnect you from your family, job, education and government, who can fine you or put you in jail.
More to follow, I'm sure, once Open Rights Group and other activist organizations get working on this. In the meantime, tell every Briton you know. If we can't stop this, it's beginning of the end for the net in Britain.
Click to expand...
 
Great. Something to expect over here in twenty years. The U.K. is the beta test for modern fascism (and yes government and corporations colluding like this is actual fascism).
 
Uhm, I'm pretty sure introducing something like this here would require changes to the constitution/bill of rights. Can't imagine it would be that easy to introduce in the UK either. So far I'd say it's just a hoax, particularly as it's "reliable information from a source close to the government."
 
Nope it's genuine, just add it to the list of "stuff the conservatives will Ctrl-Z when they get in"
 
Blind's sig is particularly fitting. Idiot politicians have been pushing for measures like these for years. If it actually gets somewhere I'd be surprised; but the fact that they're pushing it is worrying enough.
 
WillDAQ said:
Nope it's genuine, just add it to the list of "stuff the conservatives will Ctrl-Z when they get in"
Click to expand...
Genuine, meaning including the implications metioned in the parentheses, like "he could create jail terms for file-sharing"? That is quite a strong deviation from the basic principles of democracy in my book.
 
It seems that allowing someone to change the law without Parliamentary oversight is legislation without representation.

And I think England tried that before; it didn't work out so well.

As for doing this in the US, someone will just appoint a "Czar" and get around it.
 
New "remedies" for online infringements... that's downright chilling.
 
It's the 1500s all over again. What's funny is that you're able to watch the Spanish inquisition for free, legally (I believe) on YouTube.
 
doesn?t surprise me that much...
The UK is quickly becoming one of the scariest countries in the world when it comes to personal freedom. And I?m not just talking about downloading some music and the likes. Did they not get the message Orwell was trying to get across? There is a reason why 1984 is standard literature in schools all over the world. The thing that scares me is that everyone seems to be alright with this stuff on the island...

In retrospect I?m really glad I turned down the offers from their universities a couple of years back...
 
The government may want to be Big Brother (a la 1984) fortunately they have buggered up the education system so it will soon be impossible to get anyone competent to run these things - saved from Fascism by incompetence.
 
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX1SSiFWF-s[/YOUTUBE]
 
LeVeL said:
Wow. Just wow. And what does this have to do with pirates anyways? Just find some texans, give them rifles, put them on boats, and let them snipe all the pirates!
Click to expand...
Wrong pirates.
 
As usual, a source that fails to understand even basic principles of English law.
These powers are known as Henry VIII clauses and have been around, unsurprisingly, since Henry VIII. They are not that uncommon. What the article fails to mention is that anything done under the clause has to pass Parliamentary oversight, either through negative or affirmative resolution. Negative resolution means that the bill will be layed before Parliament, and will only become law if no challenge is made in 40 days. Affirmative resolution means that the bill will only become law if Parliament affirm it with a vote.
Without seeing these supposed amendments it is impossible to say which kind of resolution will be needed.
 
This sounds a bit ropey.

I have heard about cutting the internet access bit but it's frankly impossible to stop someone who downloads illegally to...stop. Yeah, you can cut off the Internet at one place but the Internet is a pool of ones and zeros of which can be snaffled at any given moment.

I wonder, would they cut off all internet if everyone downloaded something illegally?

Maybe that's a way of getting back. A pirate revolution, no? Like on a given date, everyone downloads an illegal song or video or...number or something.

Like salt.
 
As said to Boris Johnson during an episode of Have I got news for you;

"What do you tories do when Tony puts on the Thacher wig and says I'm not for turning?".

Labour's lost sight of itself. It's truely sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top