Skip to main content

1-20 of 1,197 results for subject:Subscriptions

Subject X
Communication

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Communication (1,197)
More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

4: Clause 8, page 12, line 23, after "disputes;" insert— "( ) that there are adequate arrangements under the code for OFCOM to obtain any information or assistance from internet service providers or copyright owners that OFCOM reasonably require for the purposes of administering and enforcing the code;"

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c468
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am proposing this group of seven amendments, which are needed for the purpose of tidying up the Bill rather than for any new policy purpose. For example, the first amendment, which removes text from new Section 124E(5) in Clause 8 is because it is otiose for paragraph...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c467-8
House
House of Lords

5: Clause 10, page 14, line 24, leave out from "subscriber" to end of line 25 and insert ", within the meaning of section 124B(3), in relation to the provider of the service and one or more copyright owners." Amendment 5 agreed. Amendment 6 not moved. Clause 12 : Code...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c468-9
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I wish to make a couple of remarks, as I have my name down to this amendment. I thank the Minister for being so patient with us for raising so many points as we went round and round certain issues several times, seeking different ways of trying to...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c463
House
House of Lords

12: Clause 16, page 20, line 18, at end insert— "and shall, in relation to any provision for payment by subscribers and the funding of their own costs, first be subject to an economic and social impact assessment confirming that relevant subscribers are not in practice, by reason of such...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c469
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister for those assurances. They go a long way to assuaging the fears of a huge swathe of the internet industry about what, as the Minister said, could come about as the result of the law of unintended consequences. The only thing that he did not answer...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c480
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I have already reminded the House of the Government’s concerns on the legal status of Clause 18 and the lack of transparency and accountability with which it has been inserted into the Bill, and I have indicated our intention to bring forward a revised provision to deal with...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c480
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that it is important to deal with the position of search engines, which are not directly addressed by Clause 18. Google is very good at blocking access to sites; it just relegates them to page 256. If it does not like something...

Member
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c479
House
House of Lords

It might benefit the House if that question were dealt with. Perhaps I should first make my point on Amendment 15, which the Minister can deal with quite easily. I asked for Amendment 15 and my other three amendments to be degrouped from the others—the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, has...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c478-9
House
House of Lords

In that case, following my noble friend Lord Maxton, what mechanism do the Government have for introducing new material into the Bill? I appreciate that I am asking this question of the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, when it should probably be directed to the Government.

Member
Lord Gordon of Strathblane (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c478
House
House of Lords

In moving this amendment, I will also speak to Amendments 16, 21 and 22. There are different views about the merits of the Bill that we have so carefully discussed over the past three months and there is clearly much to discuss in the other place. Of course, there are...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c471-2
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I assume that the noble Lords, Lord De Mauley and Lord Howard, will be speaking to their amendments in this group, which I support. I do not like Clause 18 at all, which is unclear in certain areas. I have tabled a set of amendments, which we shall...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c473
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I made the Government’s view of this clause clear on Report. I certainly agree that we should have a way of tackling online copyright infringement that will not be susceptible to the provisions in Clauses 4 to 17, but I am afraid that this clause is not it....

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c475-6
House
House of Lords

My Lords, with the permission of the House, it may help if I clarify that issue, which I know a little about. It has to do with Europe and the e-commerce directive. ISPs, in acting purely as a way of accessing the internet—as a pipeline to other content—and not delivering...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c475
House
House of Lords

15: Clause 18, page 22, line 20, at end insert "and, in the case of online search service providers, the extent to which inclusion of, or access to, copyright infringing content is incidental to the main purpose of the search service,"

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c477
House
House of Lords

My Lords, first, I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in the debate and, in particular, the noble Lord, Lord Triesman, who it is nice to see again in his place in a more positive frame of mind. I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, for his...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c476-7
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am delighted that we are making progress in this direction. Whether the Government will listen to the siren voices of British Telecom and others saying that this is a step in the wrong direction, I do not know. It seems to me that that was where Clause...

Member
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c473-4
House
House of Lords

The noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, has put the point that needs to be made on this clause extremely adequately, so I will not waste the House’s time any further. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c473
House
House of Lords

My Lords, when the Minister responds, it would be worth him answering the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, although he is no longer in his place. Why are the ISPs so exercised about such issues? Why were they allowed to get into the position where this sort...

Member
Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c474
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, for his generous comments and record the fact that I agree with much of what he said. I add my voice in urging the Government again to have a discussion with the search engine companies. I know that it will not...

Member
Lord Triesman (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 March 2010
Reference
718 c474
House
House of Lords