OK. There's something not quite right with this picture. First... BT and Talk Talk lost their appeal against the "three strikes" rule of the Digital Economy Act
, as noted here
(BBC) and here
(PCPro) amongst others. This basically means that they technically can be held liable for the 'prosecution' of 'penalties' associated with that act (as in 'carrying out a judgement'). Lobbyists are naturally 'rejoicing' the fact that the "law" as been upheld.
Here's the problem. According to the Hargreaves Review of Intellectual Property
(which was posted about previously here
), the "decision to implement a “three strikes” rule and demand that ISP's play a role in internet censorship was based only on information supplied by copyright holder lobbyists
" (the report actually says the following "Much of the data needed to develop empirical evidence on copyright and designs is privately held. It enters the public domain chiefly in the form of “evidence” supporting the arguments of lobbyists (“lobbynomics”) rather than as independently verified research conclusions." [ pg18: sec2.13, point 3])
. So irrespective as to the position ISP's are now being put in, the basic premise of the entire Act is biased towards those supplying the evidence in support of it. One then has to ask the question as to wither those in opposition had a 'fair crack of the whip'.
By the way, I don't advise reading the report unless you want to make your blood boil, the Governments attitude to this whole affair can be summed up with the word "meh" whilst cashing-up the till.Additional Reading