Skip to main content

1-20 of 208 results for subject:Subscriptions

Subject X
Video piracy

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Video piracy (208)

Publisher


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

My Lords, I am very grateful to the Minister for his comments. It is quite a complicated area. I think we probably both need to take each other’s words away to reconsider them. As I said, Amendment 175 is certainly not perfect. On that basis, I beg leave to withdraw...

Member
Lord De Mauley (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1321
House
House of Lords

Perhaps I may intervene before the noble Lord withdraws the amendment. I would have added my name to Amendment 176 if it had not already had four names on it. I should like to have some legal advice. I know that when matters reach the courts it is what is...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1321
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I very inappropriately failed to make a short contribution on the amendment, which was also signed by those of us on these Benches. The noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, made such a good fist of it that it needed no further addition. The Minister has partly answered on...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1321-2
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord that my noble friend Lord Howard of Rising has won the argument on Amendment 171 and that I should not pursue Amendment 173. However, I want to set the noble Lord straight on where I am aiming at in this Bill...

Member
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1314-5
House
House of Lords

I was hoping that I would inspire the noble Lord to make a comment and I thank him for his assessment. I do not feel that I can respond as to why we are not doing that, but I will take that point away. I thank him for that part...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1313-4
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I speak to Amendment 170. Although ISPs have the major role to play, copyright owners have a crucial role to play, too. It is they who generate the evidence on which the whole process is based. How they do that, the methods and technicalities of the systems that...

Member
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1316
House
House of Lords

My Lords, the amendment is a straightforward attempt to bring the Minister out of his lair to debate subsection (5). It seems extremely broad in the context. It states: ""Internet service providers must give OFCOM any assistance that OFCOM reasonably require for the purposes of complying with any direction under...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1316
House
House of Lords

169: Clause 10, page 13, leave out lines 13 to 15

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1316
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have contributed to this short debate. We have already discussed a wide range of issues that the Secretary of State might want Ofcom to look at in any assessment under Clause 10. It seems self-evident that on a great number of them,...

Member
Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1317-8
House
House of Lords

My Lords, the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, is extremely important. We have to be balanced. If we are going to require certain things of the ISPs, then the other side—or the other party involved—must also have the duty to provide them, otherwise the process is hugely...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1316-7
House
House of Lords

My Lords, "participating in technical workshops" sounds a bit thin. This is a very wide clause to ensure that internet service providers take part in technical workshops. I hope that when the amendment comes back on Report, as I fear it must because the reply has been so thin—

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1318
House
House of Lords

I can help the noble Lord to some extent. One thing that the ISPs might need to provide Ofcom with is technical help in areas such as participating in technical workshops. We do not take the view—here I revert to the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas—that copyright...

Member
Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1318
House
House of Lords

My Lords, perhaps I may pick up on the reply given to my amendment, now that I have had time to research it. If this applies and a reference in Clause 16 brings copyright owners, who are fairly peripheral people, within Ofcom’s ambit, why do we need this subsection, because...

Member
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1318
House
House of Lords

This is getting curiouser and curiouser. Although the noble Lord has been helpful in giving me something extra as regards the information which might be required from an internet service provider, it seems to me that he has made the case for the amendment in the name of the noble...

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1319
House
House of Lords

175: Clause 11, page 13, line 25, leave out "or" and insert "and"

Member
Lord De Mauley (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1320
House
House of Lords

Amendments 175 and 176 focus on the reasons that the Secretary of State may give for imposing a technical obligation. They raise a number of points so, while being as brief as I can, I shall try to set out my concerns as clearly as possible. Amendment 175 was intended...

Member
Lord De Mauley (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1320
House
House of Lords

My Lords, the amendments in this group build on my noble friend’s suggestions of other useful criteria that should be included in any assessment by Ofcom. I have already mentioned briefly the cost of any measure and I should like to emphasise how important it is that proper scrutiny is...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1305-6
House
House of Lords

My Lords, as regards those who produce material which is shared without any remuneration to the originator, I am in favour of them being properly compensated for that which is downloaded. I speak as someone who, for the first time, has received a letter about ACS:Law Solicitors, which I found...

Member
Baroness Howe of Idlicote (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1305
House
House of Lords

That was a very interesting response and no doubt we will give it due mature consideration. In the mean time, on behalf of my noble friend, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 157 withdrawn. Amendments 158 to 160 not moved. Amendment 161 Moved by

Member
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1303
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I can see the purpose of the amendments; we should use "must" rather than "may", because we must consult everyone and leaving too much to discretion can be dangerous. Sadly, the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, does not appear to be here. I can see a possible point in...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
26 January 2010
Reference
716 c1302
House
House of Lords