Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) 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]
I have some sympathy with the purpose behind the amendment. Arguably, subscribers are in at least as much need of protection against negligence on the part of copyright owners and internet service providers as are internet service providers in their relationship with copyright holders. I certainly concur with the noble Lord, Lord Howard, on that. However, this situation will not arise in practice. Subscribers will have a clear path to appeal at each stage of the process. The grounds of such appeals will certainly include the failure of the internet service supplier or the copyright owner to comply with the code or the copyright infringement provisions, or failure to observe the provisions of the Data Protection Act, which in any case contains its own penalties for failure to comply. Furthermore, under the initial obligations, no loss or damage will be suffered by the subscriber unless they are identified via a court order and the copyright owner takes legal action against them. In those circumstances, any failure on the part of the copyright owner or internet service provider to comply with the rules will be taken into account by a court. Moreover, under the technical obligations, there is a further recourse to the First-tier Tribunal for those subscribers who are not satisfied with the decision of the initial appeals body. Any failure on the part of the copyright owner or internet service provider to comply with the rules will be taken into account by the tribunal. The Government believe that it is right that the appeals process should be exhausted before any penalty is imposed, which answers the question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Howard. In other words, no subscriber will suffer any harm until they have had the opportunity of arguing their case in front of the First-tier Tribunal. On balance, this provision is not needed. The Bill builds sufficient safeguards into the process for subscribers. I hope that in the light of my explanation the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c1035
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-11 10:02:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_612449
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_612449
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_612449