---

Digital Economy Bill [HL]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. This is another way of coming at the problem that was dealt with in the amendment moved earlier in our proceedings by my noble friend Lord Razzall. It tries to insist that copyright owners first undertake the notification process under this Bill rather than go through the courts. It is precisely the act of going through the courts that has produced some of the hardship cases that the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, mentioned; he gave the figure of some 10,000. That is a matter of concern to us and I am interested that the Minister picked up on it. I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in the debate. Clearly this is a shared issue, but it goes even wider than we have described; the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, was specific on this. The question is: how can you fix liability effectively unless you have a UK copyright owner vehicle? How can you insist that a copyright owner observes the code unless you have a UK vehicle to which liability can be attached? As they say, some of my best friends are copyright owners, but we are trying to prevent the rogues from operating in such circumstances. The Minister has thrown the equivalent of the book at me—certainly the international trade book—in terms of TRIPS, prohibition on discrimination and so on, and I am sure that he is well advised from the trade law angle. However, there must be a way of preventing some of these international organisations from operating in an irresponsible fashion. I do not believe that the elements that the Minister has described—TRIPS or a prohibition on discrimination—necessarily allow unfettered behaviour by these organisations. Of course we must observe our free trade obligations—we on these Benches defer to no one in our support of free trade. However, just as environmental and quality conditions are imposed in trade, so we must expect international organisations to operate responsibly. If that means establishing a vehicle in the UK, that is not unreasonable. Indeed, it would be a benefit for the purposes of the Bill more broadly and would fix responsibility on a clearly defined UK vehicle. I am not yet satisfied with what the Minister has said. However, whether through Amendment 129, which is yet to come from the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, through this amendment or through the previous amendment, tabled by my noble friend Lord Razzall, we have to try to find a solution to these issues, otherwise injustice will continue. Although I shall withdraw the amendment, we will take this matter further on a future occasion. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 74A withdrawn. Clause 4 agreed. Amendment 75 Moved by