UK record companies have asked the government to amend copyright law, imposing a liability burden for Internet Service Providers in respect of copyright infringements.

The BPI (British Recorded Music Industry) which represents the big four record labels, is demanding that the government should make ISPs liable for copyright infringement on the Internet. They want the ability to sue ISPs on the basis that broadbaand subscribers are using the service to download copyrighted music.

Their demand - together with their proposed wording for the new piece of law that they want - is to be found in the BPI submission to the recent UK government consultation on peer-to-peer filesharing. Specifically, they want the government to incorporate a new article in the Copyright Designs and Patent Act (CDPA), which would obligate ISPs implement technical measures to prevent copyright infringement. The BPI's proposed new Article 97B of the CDPA contains the following text:

Read more: UK music companies demand ISP liability in copyright law

A UK report on digital Britain, which will reveal the UK government verdict on file-sharing and 3-strikes policy, has been delayed, apparently due to a "ministerial quagmire", according to a report in the Times Newspaper this week.

It is not clear exactly what the "quagmire" consists of, but if various leaked comments to different media are anything to go by, it would seem there is disagreement at the highest level on how to deal with the issue. According to The Times article, the Digital Britain report was to have been released on on Monday, and it is now expected to come out tomorrow.

The report has been preceded by the publication of contributions to the BERR consultation on peer-to-peer file sharing earlier this month. BERR has

Read more: UK polarised on file sharing and 3-strikes

Report from the ISP Future Content Models and Enforcment Strategies Summit 2008, Kensington, London 7/8 July 2008

In light of today's announcement by the UK government, the words of Kiaron Whitehead, legal counsel for the BPI, are ringing a very sombre tone. Speaking at the ISP Future Content Models conference, just 2 weeks ago, he outlined a 3 strikes proposal, and made it clear that the BPI is prepared to sue ISPs who don't comply. His words certainly put a different complexion on the word 'voluntary' - it is about as 'voluntary' as the press gangs that a couple of centuries ago found ' recruits' for the army.

Here are some excerpts from his presentation:

'ISPs have an obligation to work with us. The government must help facilitate that process.'

'The debate is no longer about whether something should be done, but how it should be done'

'ISPs have a legal responsbility to enforce... first an educational letter, second temporary suspension, third cancel the account. Ultimately, it may be possible to implement a technical solution. ISPs need to test implementing that technical solution. For ISPs who refuse, we are left with one option - litigation.'

'The government will assist us in one, talking; and two, putting in place legislation to ensure that ISPs are clear as to their responsibilities.'

'Evidence (against users who are alleged to have infringed copyright) has to stand up to rigorous testing. The BPI evidence collection is robust'.