The Digital Economy Act has never been popular with the general public or
providers, with BT and TalkTalk launching an appeal against the act, that
was ultimately unsuccessful. The costs of a letter writing campaign whose
primary goal was to reduce the level of copyright infringement in the UK has
been set, such that providers would have to pay 25% of the costs, ultimately meaning that consumers would
have to pay the bill, both those who infringe copyright and those that do
not.
Ofcom has recently briefed ISPA on the progress of the code of practice that
will govern the letter writing campaign, and Trefor Davies has a clear summary
of the update on
his blog.
The main thrust is that while the industry had been expecting the letter
campaign to start in the spring of 2013, Q1 2014 is now the expected date. Most
of the delays are due to procedural reasons, and that the current Government
may be quietly ignoring it.
While a letter writing campaign may have some merit, in the same way a
teacher asking a naughty child to stop scratching their name into a desk may
have some merit, the speed at which the digital world is moving may reduce
copyright infringement to levels where the media industries accept the losses.
Services like Sky AnyTime+, Netflix and Lovefilm are all making it easier for
people to access films and TV shows when they want, and at a reasonable
price.
Given the delays to the code of practice, one can’t be blamed for wondering
if there may be some in power who hope it will quietly vanish, and be forgotten
by which ever party wins the May 2015 General Election.
Test your broadband speed
Follow us on X for the latest broadband news 
The DEA was a travesty in any case, having been conjured up by a formerly disgraced member of the government after (coincidentally, of course) socialising with a big-wig in the entertainment industry, not to mention the disgusting way it was ploughed through parliament in the dying hours of a session.
The grammar on this article was below standards Andrew. 1. “has quietly ignoring it”? 2. “There speed at which .. ” tut tut!
Thats two grammar mistakes removed from the article.
What about “if you had forgot” – shouldn’t it be “if you had forgotten” ??
If people have issues with grammar why don’t they send PMs to those people concerned. I suppose they just want to look clever on here. That’s sad I think.
DEA: I am rather incensed that innocent customers have to pay towards the cost. None commerial copyright infringement is AFAIK still a civil matter so enforcement costs should be wholly covered by the media companies concerned.
@shaunhw
It is still hard to imagine but any who still buys blank cassette tapes are still paying a levy to the media companies, so these media companies will still and always will require that EVERYONE regardless of usage will always pay a levy to prop up the business empire. This is TOTALLY wrong and out government should have a more backbone to stand up to big especially American media companies
Hopefully the delays will give people more time to get accustomed to VPNs.
@welshwarrior
He was expecting ten hands to be raised.
Here I am commenting comments;I agree 100% with:
“Posted by shaunhw 1 day ago
If people have issues with grammar why don’t they send PMs to those people concerned.”
the not those, but I can’t PM you nor shaunhw.
How will they detect infringement? ie will details be forwarded by rights owners of those, for example, sharing via torrents. Or will the ISP install some sort of surveillance software that will inspect packets? ie might you get away with it if you download rather than upload?
The rights owner (or company working on their behalf) will inform a provider, that IP A was found sharing Film B. The ISP would then look up which account had the IP at that time and then write letter to customer C.