Skip to main content

1-20 of 207 results for subject:Subscriptions

Subject X
Schools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Schools (207)

Publisher


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

Digital Economy Bill (HL). Lords Committee stage third day. Clause 4 agreed to. Clauses 5, 6, 7 agreed to as amended. Clause 8 under consideration.

Department
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Type
Committee of the Whole House (HL); Debates on bills
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c788-868
House
House of Lords

My Lords, Amendment 116 relates to a very straightforward point. I hope that I do not require the help of the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, to persuade the Government to accept the amendment, because it is so obvious that we need to protect the subscribers. This part of the Bill...

Member
Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c867
House
House of Lords

113: Clause 8, page 10, line 35, at end insert— "( ) a requirement that reports are to be considered as sensitive personal data within the meaning of section 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998; and ( ) a requirement that reports are not exempt from disclosure under section...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c865
House
House of Lords

I think the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, underestimates himself. His amendments are always worth consideration even if, on occasion, we must agree to differ. He has managed to bring in some very distinguished support for his amendments this evening. I hope the Minister will be able to reassure the Committee...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c865
House
House of Lords

I suspect that the Committee will find my stream of amendments somewhat wearisome, but this is the final one in this run. The batting average is pretty low at the moment, so I will try to improve on it in terms of the ministerial responses rather than the speed at...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c865
House
House of Lords

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones. He has brought a new dimension to streaming that I had not anticipated. The amendment would treat a copyright infringement report as sensitive personal data under the Data Protection Act 1998, and would require ISPs to be obliged to disclose a copyright infringement...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c865-6
House
House of Lords

116: Clause 8, page 10, line 45, at end insert "; and ( ) requirements on the time limit for notifying subscribers which must be no more than one month"

Member
Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c867
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that absolutely splendid response on the Data Protection Act. I do not propose to answer at this very moment, but I will have teams of data protection lawyers running through his response, which was absolutely fascinating. At this time of the evening, we...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c866
House
House of Lords

My Lords, it is always good to have a former Lord Chancellor enter the lists on your behalf. I thank the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay, because I thought that he phrased it exactly right. I know that if he suggests something, it is robust in technical legal terms....

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c864-5
House
House of Lords

Perhaps it is worth the Minister’s while considering whether, if it is generally speaking possible to do it in days, we should have a short period as the primary period, with the possibility of extension up to, let us say, three months. I understand that if we say that it...

Member
Lord Mackay of Clashfern (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c864
House
House of Lords

We will take that point into account—it is a sensible suggestion—but I return to my previous point. We believe that this is a matter for the code. The point made by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay, is probably a sensible one to be embraced in the code. I...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c864
House
House of Lords

We want to ensure that the Bill sets out the time limit for making a copyright infringement report, and we suggest three months. There is some sort of Sword of Damocles hanging over a subscriber, and it is important that there should be a time limit within which a copyright...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c862
House
House of Lords

112: Clause 8, page 10, line 35, at end insert "which shall be no more than three months"

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c862
House
House of Lords

My Lords, this is another case where we need to balance a proper concern with the position of a subscriber with the need to keep flexibility where there is not good cause to stipulate otherwise. On the face of it, this is a reasonable limit to set on the time...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c863-4
House
House of Lords

It seems to me to be fair that if an infringement report is to have consequences, it should be issued within a reasonable time. I do not know the circumstances that would suggest three months exactly, but looking at the matter generally, three months seems a reasonable period. It is...

Member
Lord Mackay of Clashfern (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c863
House
House of Lords

The noble Lord raises an interesting question on how far into the future a subscriber should be held to account for past infringements. I agree with him that there are many benefits in keeping the period from detection to notification as short as possible. It is fairly clear that if...

Member
Lord De Mauley (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c862-3
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister for that reply. Before withdrawing the amendment, I shall take up his comments on Amendment 108. Given the significant debate that we keep having, quite rightly, about the natural justice elements of these proposals to ensure that the individual has the appropriate opportunities to go through...

Member
Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c839
House
House of Lords

The clause provides for retrospective legislation. The noble Lord, Lord Razzall, is right to have concerns about it, which we on these Benches share. At the very best of times, retrospective legislation is something to be wary about. I do not think that this is one of those occasions when...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c840
House
House of Lords

I support the amendments. We cannot start doing this retrospectively as it could cause chaos. If it cannot be complied with, what would be the penalties? Amendment 93A would be a much better amendment. One thing I like about that amendment is that if the Bill is working, one does...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c840-1
House
House of Lords

I shall also speak to Amendment 93A, but will not move it at this stage. I always get confused when there is an "A" in an amendment. This is an important issue. The amendments are clearly probing, and to some extent if Amendment 93 were accepted, the argument for Amendment...

Member
Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
18 January 2010
Reference
716 c839-40
House
House of Lords