---

Digital Economy Bill [HL]

My Lords, it is worth recalling that the purpose of the Bill is within these clauses. Online infringement of copyright through the unlawful use of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks is a civil matter where there is widespread sharing of copyrighted material without any remuneration involved either to those sharing the files or, alas, to the owners and creators of the copyrighted material. As I have said before, moving towards any sanctions is quite a long process. They are taken only against serial infringers and therefore someone would have to have quite a track record before any sanctions were taken. It must be remembered that we were talking about not even introducing technical measures until at least a year after we had seen whether the gradualist, educated process had had any effect. I am going to keep returning to this so that we do not create the impression that sanctions are going be taken against people in a very short time—that is not the case. On the substance of what my noble friend is trying to do—and I understand the direction of travel—it is extremely difficult for copyright owners to address such widespread activity, which is why we have introduced the provisions in this part of the Bill. In many ways, it is easier and simpler when there is money involved since, if somebody is making money from copyright infringement, it becomes a criminal offence and a different set of procedures comes into play. There is also a clear target and, as in the simple instruction to detectives, the same thing would apply to enforcement authorities—"follow the money". That is not what we are talking about here. Peer-to-peer file-sharing is not necessarily about people making money out of it; it just happens to be that what they are doing is illegal. So it would be pointless and even misleading to add this to the list of notifications information. I hope, in the light of that explanation, that my noble friend will feel able to withdraw the amendment.