UK regulator plans a taste of ACTA for small ISPs
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 24 May 2010
Ofcom's proposal to exclude small ISPs from the Digital Economy Act 3-strikes measures is not quite what it seems. One interpretation is very interesting in the context of the online service provider ‘policy' provision in ACTA.
More information is now appearing about how the UK's Digital Economy Act 3-strikes provisions will work in practice. Reports from the discussions with the regulator, Ofcom, on 3-strikes measures suggest that small ISPs will be exempted. On the surface, this would be a good thing. However, when one examines the detail, there is a caveat - the exemption will only apply if they do not carry infringing traffic.
This caveat should be carefully assessed.
Ofcom has already determined that it will go after ISPs which carry traffic from alleged infringers. Exactly how it will decide which ISPs are
doing so is currently open to question, but it does appear that Ofcom plans to monitor traffic from all ISPs and will somehow keep an eye on the levels of ‘infringers' on each one.
The idea is that alleged copyright 'infringers' will migrate to those ISPs which are exempt, therefore one by one, those ISPs that are attracting the 'infringers' also need to be brought within the remit of the law, and Ofcom will call them in as it sees their 'infringing' traffic rising.
Therefore, the exemption can only apply if an ISP does not have any alleged 'infringers' as customers.
How does a small ISP ensure that it does not carry traffic which the rights-holders will allege is ‘infringing'? It may be able to limit itself to business users - and pass the liability on to its customers, which means that the overhead also passes to UK businesses. Otherwise, and possibly as well as, it has to install deep packet inspection equipment to check traffic passing over its network, and block certain types of traffic - which may be a hinderance to its business users.
If Ofcom's proposal is considered in light of the ACTA, it becomes even more interesting :
ACTA Article 2.18 Option 1
: condition the application of the provisions of subparagraph (a) on meeting the following requirements:
(i) an online service provider adopting and reasonably implementing a policy[58] to address the unauthorized storage or transmission of materials protected by copyright or related rights [ except that no Party may condition the limitations in subparagraph (a) on the online service provider's monitoring its services or affirmatively seeking facts indicating that infringing activity is occurring];
This provision would exempt ISPs from liability for copyrighted content only if they implement a policy in respect of copyright enforcement.
Thus, under ACTA, a small ISP may not be told to monitor traffic. However, perhaps it can be told to ensure that it is not carrying infringing traffic? Or it could be told that the regulator is checking up on the number of times IP addresses allocated to the ISP appear on the P2P networks?
The ISP could therefore develop a 'policy' to comply with the regulator's instruction, which might be 3-strikes, but it could be something else.
The legal language would - on the surface - be compliant with EU aquis communitaire although it is questionable whether they would be compliant with the intent of aquis , specifically the E-commerce directive.
The assumption until now, has always been that this ACTA refeference to ISP ‘policy' means 3-strikes. It may do, but perhaps the Ofcom proposals point to some alternative and additional interpretations.
Either way, it looks as though small ISPs in the UK, far from being exempt, will have the onerous condition placed on them to police their networks, or have the equally onerous regulatory overhead of dealing with rights-holder allegations that Ofcom is developing.
Note: The discussions are being held at Ofcom whilst it is drawing up the implementation code for the UK's 3-strikes /graduated response copyright enforcement measures. This is the so-called Initial Obligations Code.
The Initial Obligations Code will deal with the warning and notification process for Internet users; cost-sharing between ISPs and rights-holders; and the "appeals process". Effectively, this is Ofcom - the regulator - making the law - the Act passed by Parliament only sets out the concepts, and this is the detail of how it will work.
See also: Trefor Davies , of the small ISP Timico, concerning the Ofcom discussions.
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2010) UK regulator plans a taste of ACTA? http://www.iptegrity.com 24 May 2010
- Article Views: 11014
IPtegrity politics
- How could they ban X?
- Grok AI images: can compliance be enforced?
- AI and copyright – an author’s viewpoint
- UK climb-down over Apple back-door was foreseeable
- Copyright wars 3.0: the AI challenge
- Why would the UK take on Apple?
- What's influencing tech policy in 2025?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy analyst: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- How could they ban X?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
