Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl of Erroll (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].


Digital Economy Bill [HL]

We are now taking three amendments together, which is very sensible. Having seen at first hand the arguments around Nominet’s domain dispute resolution service which had to be revamped about a year ago, it would behove the Minister well to take a look at what happened. There is a lot of suspicion about the genuine independence of some of the people involved in resolving disputes, which is a thorny issue. Perception by the public and trust in the system are everything in dispute resolutions. I prefer the pair of amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas—Amendments 120 and 125—as they would bring in something that is above suspicion and beyond reproach. The second half of Amendment 125 proposes no cost to the subscriber, which makes it accessible. Cost always worries me, otherwise the old blackmail can happen; someone will settle out of court for £2,000 because it will cost £3,000 to go to the tribunal. Amendment 124 suggests that Ofcom might set it up, but I am worried that it could be set up in such a way that makes it less obvious and transparent that it is an independent body. I would therefore go for Amendments 120 and 125. Something along those lines should definitely be adopted.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c1023 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Codes of practice Appeals Broadcasting Costs Competition Computer networks Copyright Communication Fees and charges ICT Internet Ofcom Tribunals Subscriptions Internet service providers
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk