The new draft code laid out by Ofcom specifies their new ‘three strike’ policy in order to minimise in not completely stop illegal downloaders. The policy is hoped to come into effect from March 2014 and will then work on the basis of the illegal downloaders receiving warning letters from their internet service providers under the Ofcom draft code for the government’s anti-piracy regime. If downloaders get three of the warning letters in a year they will face anonymous information or their downloading provided to the copyright owners this could then be used against them in a court order to reveal the identity of the downloader so that legal action is able to take place against the downloader.
Ed Vaizey a creative industries minister agrees with Ofcom in that the law should be changed. Over the past decade the music industry alone is said to have seen a drastic decrease in its revenue for which it blames internet piracy. Vaizey states that the government creates the correct environment for businesses to expand including the creative industries. Therefore the industry has the right to protect what it produces and should have the right to charge people for access to it. A change in law would greatly benefit the industry as it would be more protected and may be able to make up for some of the revenue they have lost over the previous year’s allowing the industry to continually grow. Vaizey also believes that by educating the public in piracy and where to find the legitimate content people may stop committing piracy.
Is downloading music stealing from the music industry? The music industry has prospered for many years in the past with few copyright problems. However, with the rise of the Internet in the late 1990 s, the music industry began to face a new foe like no other. With the combination of software such as Napster and the MP 3 technology, users can now download songs with near CD quality at no cost. ...
However, executive director of the Open Rights group Jim Killock put forward the argument against the law change by saying that the draft code can be easily flawed and potentially leave places like hotels, bars and libraries who offer an internet connection to their customers via WI-FI at risk of being falsely accused of piracy. Killock believes option to appeal offered by the new draft code is a ‘joke’ and that innocent people will end up in court having done nothing wrong.
I believe that the law should be changed in order to protect the creative industries rights however, I think that Ofcom should have thought out the draft code more thoroughly and that there is room for improvement in order to make it fairer for both parties. I personally think that they are targeting and punishing the wrong people and that the law would be more effective if they were to target the source of the pirated music. People are illegally downloading because it is offered as an option on the internet and is a cheaper way of doing things. I believe that if the people who are creating these websites were to be targeted and punished that this would have more of an effect. If the websites aren’t there then people won’t use them and piracy will not be committed. Also by doing it this way there is less chance that innocent people are going to be accused of something they haven’t done. I also think that by doing this the industries that would normally have to ‘foot the bill’ for the letters being sent out to downloaders would save money as they would not be targeting the wrong people.
To conclude, I believe the law should be changed however it should be regularly updated as technology develops and more options become available to the public. I also think that the public should be made more aware of the current piracy laws because I believe that some people would be illegally downloading unknowingly and then being punished for something they did without knowing.