UK 3-strikes bill: Code to limit Internet access
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 27 January 2010
The Digital Economy Bill includes a new Code to limit Internet access. The government may bypass consultation process to bring it into force.
The UK Digital Economy Bill, currently going through the House of Lords, provides for a new Code which will implement the government's plans for dealing with peer-to-peer filesharing and any form of copyright infringement via the Internet. The Code is to be drawn up behind the scenes, by Ofcom, without scrutiny of Parliament.
The new code is outlined in
clauses 12 and 13 of the Bill: Code by Ofcom about obligations to limit Internet access. This code will set out the proposed implementation of ‘technical measures' - this will be the third strike of the three strikes system . Technical measures are the means of punishing Internet users who are alleged to have downloaded copyright infringing material. They include automated suspension of Internet access, and throttling of bandwidth.
The Internet limitations Code will follow the Initial Obligations Code (see previous article on iptegrity.com. ) which sets out the system of warnings to users concerning alleged copyright infringements.
Although the Bill sets out a process for bringing in Internet limitations over time - and even for making these measures optional pending the outcome of a market report by Ofcom - the word from Westminster is that the this process will not be followed. Instead, the Secretary of State may take advantage of a power in Clauses 10 and 11 of the Bill, which would effectively permit him to override this process and bring the measures in more quickly.
It is understood that Clause 10 of the Bill is intended to enable Ofcom to move ahead with the technical measures as soon as the Initial Obligations code has been introduced. In other words, the government is planning to jump the gun, and go right ahead with the Internet-limiting measures without waiting for Ofcom to do the appropriate consultation.
Moreover, the government is using the Codes in order to avoid any scrutiny of the 3-strikes measures by Parliament. This has been questioned, although rather weakly, in the House of Lords debates.
The point is that a code of practice set up by Ofcom, does not have to go before Parliament in the same way that a new law has to. If the government set out the 3-strikes measures properly in the law, then Parliament would have the opportunitty to decide what should happen, and the public would have the opportunity to voice their opinion. If a sharp-suited Ofcom employee draws it up, only his boss will oversee it.
Under this process, the public will get no say in the Code. Given the implications of the code for freedom of expression and due process under both UK and EU law, this would seem to be inappropriate.
NB: Interestingly, the language of 'limitations' mirrors the language of the Universal Services directive in the EU Telecoms Package.
Clause 12 “
124I Code by OFCOM about obligations to limit internet access
(1) For any period during which there are one or more technical obligations in force under section 124H, OFCOM must by order make a technical obligations code for the purpose of regulating those obligations.
Clause 11
“124H Obligations to limit internet access 20 (1) The Secretary of State may at any time by order impose a technical obligation on internet service providers if the Secretary of State considers it appropriate in view of— (a) an assessment carried out or steps taken by OFCOM under section 124G; or 25 (b) any other consideration.
Clause 10
Obligations to limit internet access: assessment and preparation After section 124F of the Communications Act 2003 insert— “124G Obligations to limit internet access: assessment and preparation (1) The Secretary of State may direct OFCOM to— 35 (a) assess whether one or more technical obligations should be imposed on internet service providers; (b) take steps to prepare for the obligations; (c) provide a report on the assessment or steps to the Secretary of State. 40
Read the Digital Economy Bill
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 to bring in Code to limit Internet access http://www.iptegrity.com 27 January 2010
- Article Views: 9109
IPtegrity politics
- 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
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
- What? Will UK government ignore security as it walks away from EU?
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: 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
- 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
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- 2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill