Hi Mark, Hi Mark,
The main thing to understand, is that there are bigger things at risk than, copyright infringements and poor old Robbie William's bank account. More fundamental issues that go way further than mp3's being downloaded for free or illegally. It about personal liberties vs corporate profit... The mp3 thing is more of a diversion, an easy strap-line, a good marketing and lobbying ploy. Behind all this is a much more sinister thing going on which is about lessening our freedoms and free use on the Internet. Not only that, we have witnessed the power of corporations to lobby on their own terms and no-ones elses. They have managed to hijack the government who are pretty much, out of touch and caught in their own insitutional blind allies to even begin to comprehend the consequnce of such a bill being put in place. It's about who controls the gaze of the public, who influences and diverts the gaze - our mediation? We could soon be experiencing an Internet via products alone, just like television - the Internet has not 'thankfully' been based on this form of mono-ciltural behaviour and control - YET. Wishing you well. marc > Hi, > > There's a lot in the Bill and I'm trying to get my head around many of > the finer points of it, but at the moment I'm working through the idea > that it will restrict young creatives who are hunting out resources to > help them form ideas, opinions and their own creative practice. But > also I can see the cracks inbetween the different points of view, but > only dimly for now. For example: of course everyone wants to make > money from their creative work, it's bloody hard work sometimes. But > the share economy must also come into play, mustn't it? Also, how > would you stand up in court and argue that you only downloaded that > new album by Kode 9 (or Robbie Williams!) for development of your own > creative practice? > > As I say, I'm not the most informed on the debate or the bill, but I > hope everyone keeps posting links and thoughts to the list. > > Cheers > > Mark > > On 8 April 2010 14:07, marc garrett <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > I am not sure that many people really understand the full > consequence of > what has just happened. This adds to the rise of an already dominant > panoptican state, cctv cameras, ID Cards, and now this bill. "The > Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming protested that this could mean the > blocking of the whistleblower site Wikileaks, which carries only > copyrighted work. Stephen Timms for the government said that it would > not want to see the clause used to restrict freedom of speech – > but gave > no assurance that sites like Wikileaks would not be blocked." > > "in trying to support artists’ copyright and tackle illegal > file-sharing, is about to produce a new culture – in which ISPs and > bewildered householders are deluged with threatening legal letters > from > the entertainment industry." > > Make no mistake, this is a good day for corporations, such as those > disgusting Murdoch owned newspapers like the Sun and of course - the > greedy record companies, gaining further control over content and its > freedom of distribution on the Internet. It is not just about young > people downloading free mp3's, way beyond that - amongst the bill > was a > whole load of other measures, protocols, restrictions which will hit > many of us in the future. > > As you say... > >This effectively means the UK government has the power to control > >who can link to who on the web. This is an assault on the primary > >architecture of the web, the functionality of the hyperlink and the > >capability to link any location to another. This is complementary > >action to News International raising pay-walls around its online > resources. > > The effect this will have on grass roots culture and its > stranglulation > of creative cultures using the Internet, will take effect soon. > > "Don Foster, the Liberal Democrats' spokesman for culture, media and > sport, protested that the clause was too wide-ranging: "it could apply > to Google," he complained, adding that its inclusion of the phrase > about > "likely to be used" meant that a site could be blocked on its assumed > intentions rather than its actions." > > "The govt. can tell Ofcom whether it should order ISPs to sanction > speed > blocks, bandwidth shaping, site blocking, account suspension or other > limits against an ISP customer. First, Ofcom must do consultation and > consider whether these measures would work." > > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2010/apr/08/digital-economy-bill-quick-guide-45-measures > > Anyway... > > marc > > An implicit but important part of this bill is that the > government now > > has the power, without judicial oversight, to block links to web > sites > > and pages it deems to be in breach of the Digital Economy act. This > > effectively means the UK government has the power to control who can > > link to who on the web. This is an assault on the primary > architecture > > of the web, the functionality of the hyperlink and the capability to > > link any location to another. This is complementary action to News > > International raising pay-walls around its online resources. > > > > The UK has no constitution and citizens are subjects of the > crown, not > > independent citizens. They have no constitutional rights protecting > > things like free speech. The UK’s archaic legal and constitutional > > systems have allowed a reactionary and illiberal law to be > > undemocratically brought into force and it will function to > constrain > > the development of networked and digital media in the UK. Australia > > has also done this, implementing systems similar to those used in > > China. Very bad days for the internet. > > > > Best > > > > Simon > > > > > > Simon Biggs > > > > s.biggs@ eca .ac.uk <http://ac.uk> [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> Skype: simonbiggsuk > > http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ > > Research Professor edinburgh college of art http://www. eca > .ac.uk/ <http://ac.uk/> > > *C* reative *I* nterdisciplinary *R* esearch into *C* o *L* > laborative > > *E* nvironments http://www. eca .ac.uk/circle/ > <http://ac.uk/circle/> > > *E* lectronic *L* iterature as a *M* odel of *C* reativity and *I* > > nnovation in *P* ractice http://www.elmcip.net/ > > > > > > *From: *marc garrett <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > *Reply-To: *NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > *Date: *Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:32:56 +0100 > > *To: *NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > *Subject: *[NetBehaviour] UK passes Digital Economy Bill. > > > > UK passes Digital Economy Bill. > > > > British parliament has passed the Digital Economy Bill by a vote > of 189 > > to 47. > > > > The bill covers issues such as online copyright infringement, > internet > > piracy, regulation of TV and radio, the classification of video > games > > and regulations over internet services providers. A new clause > allows > > the secretary of state for business to block websites that have > violated > > copyright. > > > > It has been criticised by digital groups who say it has not been > > discussed for a suitable amoung of time. The bill was passed in a > > "wash-up" process, which translates to a limited debate on the bill. > > Popular microblogging site Twitter has already registered protests > > against it. > > > > > http://www.newstatesman.com/digital/2010/04/digital-economy-bill-british > > _______________________________________________ > > NetBehaviour mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > > Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in > Scotland, number SC009201 > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NetBehaviour mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
