"The High Court today ruled in favour of the Government in a judicial review of measures to tackle online copyright infringement in the Digital Economy Act. Mr Justice Kenneth Parker upheld the principle of taking measures to tackle the unlawful downloading of music, films, books and other copyright material. BT and TalkTalk had brought the judicial review, claiming that the measures in the Act were not compliant with EU law and were not proportionate. The judge rejected the challenge.
The judicial review also considered the statutory instrument that splits the cost of the Act’s mass notification system between rights holders and internet service providers. The judge ruled ISPs could be made to pay a share of the cost of operating the system and the appeals process but not Ofcom’s costs from setting up, monitoring and enforcing it. The Government will now consider changes to the statutory instrument.
The Government has asked Ofcom to review section 17 of the Digital Economy Act. Ofcom are assessing whether the Act’s reserve powers to enable courts to block websites dedicated to copyright infringement could work in practice. They are due to report to the Government shortly.
Responding to the judgement, a DCMS spokesperson said:
“We are pleased that the Court has recognised these measures as both lawful and proportionate. The Government remains committed to tackling online piracy and so will set out the next steps for implementation of the Digital Economy Act shortly.”"
4 comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html
"The Government remains committed to tackling online piracy...[]"
ReplyDelete'Nuff said...
When I saw the headlines yesterday about the outcome of the JR, I died a little bit inside!! :-(
ReplyDeleteDid they really stand much of a chance? While their arguments sounded fairly convincing at the time, they were all easily answered by the government.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that the correct time and place for the ISPs to have challenged the DEA was over a year ago when it was being consulted on and passed through Parliament - but instead they supported the measures...
A Mass notifications system may costly but must never be compromised!
ReplyDelete