Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 7 April 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Digital Economy Bill [Lords].


Digital Economy Bill [Lords]

My hon. Friend has identified a further flaw in the clause that I had not. The importance of the postal address is that if clause 4(8)(d) goes through and the number of notifications is taken into account when it comes to technical measures, there is an incentive for people to appeal at the first notification, even if they know that it is their next-door neighbour who has stolen their bandwidth and downloaded something that infringes copyright. They may have put a security measure on, but this could still be taken into account if a further copyright infringement takes place, so my proposal seeks to provide clarity on that. Amendment 26 is about the powers of the Secretary of State. The Bill, as drafted, provides for the Secretary of State to decide to take technical measures at any point. If a Secretary of State were less charitable than the current incumbent—let us suppose that a successor was a lickspittle to a media oligarch who just gave instructions from his tax haven abroad—people could be cut off as a result of a single allegation of infringement by some hokey rights holder. The amendment seeks to remove or curtail the powers of the Secretary of State.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
508 c1127 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Access Disclosure of information Capital investment Copyright Broadband ICT Infrastructure Intellectual property Internet Ofcom Telecommunications Regulation Taxation Internet service providers
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk