Platform responsibility? Get the backstory - check my book The Closing of the Net - only £15.99!

Strained, inconsistent, unjustified and full of misconceptions - proposals by UK telecoms regulator Ofcom for implementation of the 3-strikes copyright enforcement regime under the DE Act, come in for  a litany of criticism by the Internet Service Providers (ISPs).

 It's rumoured the the UK Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, voted for the Digital Economy Act so that he would not have to hear of it again. If that is true, he could not have misjudged it more.  

The  ISPs are finally fighting back, and  have vented their anger in a barrage of criticism directed at the telecoms regulator, Ofcom.  They accuse Ofcom of pushing forward the ill-thought-through plans of the previous Labour government, without consideration of the implications for their business or for citizens. They allege that Ofcom is  failing UK citizens, distorting the market, and takes a

cowardly,  lame-duck attitude towards the rights-holders.


Their criticisms relate to Ofcom's draft Initial Obligations Code, and are to be found in their responses to the  consultation which closed in July. They come amid rumours of delays - reported by ISP Review - in the overall  consultation process.


The ISPs say that Ofcom is  taking a superficial approach to the appeals procedure. In particular, TalkTalk ,  the largest ISP serving consumers and small businesses,  does not mince its words, saying that Ofcom's proposals are full of miscconceptions about the subscriber responsibility for alleged infringements.


BT and TalkTalk both argue an incorrect use of terminology in the  ‘appeal' process. Subscribers will be contesting an allegation, which is different from an appeal. An appeal can only be made following a decision by a legally competent tribunal - and neither rights-holders nor ISPs are such a tribunal.


This is an important criticism, because the appeals procedure was the previous Labour government's proposed method of ensuring compliance with the EU Telecoms Package.


The ISPs argue that Ofcom's Initial Obligations code contains requirements which entail changes to their business models.


They also claim that Ofcom's proposals will create a market-distorting effect, and as such they contravene the regulator's duty to promote competition in the market.


There is a bitter battle being ignited around Ofcom's proposed 400,000 subscriber threshold, to determine whether or not ISPs will be obligated to enforce the 3-strikes copyright regime. This proposed threshold, as well as the exclusion of the mobile operators, will significantly alter the competitive boundaries within the ISP market.


There are further competitive implications surrounding the possible levels of copyright infringement which the ISPs are being asked to co-operate on. The ISPs claim that the rights holders - who after all lobbied for this legislation on the basis that their business is being harmed - can not state how many notices they will sending. This is important for the ISPs, who will have to develop, install and implement new large-scale systems for the benefit of the rights-holders.


It is unfair on the ISPs to be expected to design systems without a firm specification, especially in the current uncertain economic climate  (and they will have an engineers' rebellion on their hands if they try to do it).


This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. 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) DE Act unjustified: Internet industry  hits out  at Ofcom  8 September 2010



States v the 'Net? 

Read The Closing of the Net, by me, Monica Horten.

"original and valuable"  Times higher Education

" essential read for anyone interested in understanding the forces at play behind the web."

Find out more about the book here  The Closing of the Net


FROM £15.99

Copyright Enforcement Enigma launch, March 2012

In 2012, I presented my PhD research in the European Parliament.

Don't miss Iptegrity!  RSS/ Bookmark is the website of Dr Monica Horten. She is a policy analyst specialising in Internet governance & European policy, including platform accountability. She is a published author & Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics & Political Science. She served as an independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee on  Internet Freedom. She has worked on CoE, EU and UNDP funded projects in eastern Europe and the Caucasus. In a voluntary capacity, she has led UK citizen delegations to the European Parliament. She was shortlisted for The Guardian Open Internet Poll 2012.

Iptegrity  offers expert insights into Internet policy (and related issues on Brexit). Iptegrity has a core readership in the Brussels policy community, and has been cited in the media. Please acknowledge Iptegrity when you cite or link.  For more, see IP politics with integrity is made available free of charge for  non-commercial use, Please link-back & attribute Monica Horten. Thank you for respecting this.

Contact  me to use  iptegrity content for commercial purposes

The politics of copyright

A Copyright Masquerade - How corporate lobbying threatens online freedoms

'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review