UK kills the Wild Web

On April 8, the lords who “represent” the citizens of Britain passed the “Digital Economy bill”. The bill sets the stage for enforcing draconian measures for controlling internet users.

You will be restricted from accessing copyrighted material without paying for it, a no-brainer really since this was the presumed reason for the bill — or the excuse to get it passed. “The bill aims to make it more difficult to access copyrighted content, by blocking Web sites built around sharing such material. From the other side, the bill creates sanctions that can be applied to you, the user, should you be caught with your fingers in the copyright cookie jar,” writes CNet.

A fan of Download.com, the popular software site?  You might use software (peer-to-peer, bit torrent, etc.) available on the site to download copyrighted stuff.  For that reason the bill would allow the government to prevent any of its citizens from being able to reach download.com.  This is very similar to the filters used in China to protect its population from the scourge of free speech and information.

Google may fall under this provision as well. After all, you can use a search engine to locate hacker tools, free movies, music, and peer-to-peer software.  How usefull would the internet be without search engines?   Or a search engine that does what search engines do in China — massive filtering.  For your protection of course.

Napster, limewire, kazaa and all other p2p services is out of the question, even though these services are now legal (and struggling to survive). Past malefactors will be punished for sins of the father.

Not surprisingly, the bill effectively outlaws WikiLeaks.   One of the most worrying is that the same clause also specifically allows for blocking sites deemed ‘likely to’ infringe copyright. We don’t yet know how the government will divine whether a site is ‘likely to’ do anything, unless Ofcom is going to start employing soothsayers. There’s also a clause relating to national security, which could see legal restrictions on material ‘they’ don’t want us to see.

No open Wi-Fi. How can you expect big corporate ISPs to make any money if you are getting on the internet free at the local pub, campground or coffee shop? The bill does not actually outlaw Wi-Fi — it merely imposes on people who run these networks the legal responsibility to monitor their users who may be accessing copyrighted material.  No sane business person will want to take the risk. Fait accompli.

What about an employee at work who uses the office connection to download illegal material? the employer could be fined, or even have their ISP pull the plug on their connection to protect themselves.  Imagine the turmoil this could cause.

Its not too late yet, especially for those of us in Canada and US to ensure we do not allow our governments from policing our internet activity.  Copyright is an issue, but we need to be very careful about how we enforce it so we dont end up giving draconian powers to bureaucrats  who could use it to muzzle free information for our and future generations.  The internet gives an equal voice to everyone, and an equal opportunity to listen to any point of view is critically important.  One must be aware of net neutrality and the model of Internet 2 to make informed decisions about protecting our freedoms.