backtop


Print 102 comment(s) - last by Aloonatic.. on Jan 4 at 4:14 AM

Movie and record labels are overjoyed at the support they're receiving from the British government

Late in October DailyTech reported on the new three strikes piracy legislation proposed in the United Kingdom by Britain's majority Labour Party.  Under the legislation those caught pirating would receive two warnings, then would be cut off from the internet.  The real headache, though, is how to police the traffic and enforce the provisions on ISPs and consumers.

Despite mass objections from telecoms, citizens, electronics experts, law enforcement officials, and members of the minority conservative and socialist parties, Labour Party officials have blazed ahead with a framework to allow the legislation to be enforced.

According to Labour Party leaders, the government is planning on handing the expense of the Digital Economy Bill down to taxpayers.  That expense is estimated to be approximately £500M (approximately $800M USD).  On average, that works out to more than £25 more a year ($40 USD/year) per internet connection.

And that's considering that the government is counting on the bill reducing piracy enough to increase media revenues by £1.7B ($2.72B USD), leading to £350M ($560M USD) extra in VAT tax revenue.  If that increase isn't realized, British taxpayers could find themselves on the hook for over $1B USD in enforcement expenses.

The initial letter writing campaign is predicted to cut off 40,000 citizens from the internet and cost £1.40 ($2.20 USD) per subscription.  The government appears to have purposefully neglects to include possible economic losses based on citizens being taken offline in its estimates.

Charles Dunstone, chief executive of Carphone Warehouse, whose subsidiary TalkTalk is the biggest consumer provider of broadband in UK, is flabbergasted at how the punitive bill is gaining so much traction.  He states, "Broadband consumers shouldn’t have to bail out the music industry. If they really think it’s worth spending vast sums of money on these measures then they should be footing the bill; not the consumer."

Still the media industry is cheering the British government's decision to obey their commands, despite the taxpayer expenses and objections.  Writes the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, an industry trade group, "The overall benefits to the country far outweigh the costs."

They argue that movies like X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Star Trek have been pirated millions of times, amounting to millions in lost revenues.

And it certainly helps their argument that in the UK, like in the U.S., the media industry spends enormous sums on legal representation and government lobbying efforts.  As the growing conflict in Britain is proving, if there's one lobbyist power in the UK and U.S. that's perhaps greater than telecommunication firms, it's the media industry trade groups.




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: I'm glad
By SlyNine on 12/30/2009 3:06:11 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
There are MANY better way to reform health-care than by destroying 1/6 'th of our private economy by having the government take over health-care. Key word ; reform. Reform implies it will be made better. Fact is, yes FACT, for the huge majority of the United States citizens, this type of "reform" will lead to worst health care than we already have.

1. More expensive
2. Less choice
3. Less accessible


You do not qualify your statements with anything, you say its more expensive, yet the numbers say otherwise. Why do you think your numbers are valid while others are not.

Less choice, really? So if the if the emergency room doesn't think you need something even tho a specialist told you that you do need it. Guess what, you don't get it. Sounds like LESS choice to me.

I had to wait 2 months to see a dentist, don't tell me we are that freken accessible.

quote:
You cannot be denied care in the United States either. What was your point ?


Absolutely positively false, you do NOT have a right to health care, your privet physician can dismiss you at any time for a number of reasons. Health care in America is NOT a right, I took a college course in medical ethics buddy and the first thing they teach you is health care is NOT a right.

Again you have the emergancy room, an overpriced system that can deny you by simply saying its not needed. Can you get a second opinion, nope its up to that hospital.

quote:
Excuse me ?? I think this needs clarification. You must be comparing walk-in hospital wait times. Because when I make an appointment with my doctor, I most certainly have no wait time. Same with my dentist, chiropractor, optimoligist, etc etc.


Yea, and I had to wait 2 months to see the dentist, just because YOU didn't have any wait time doesn't mean others do not. YOU are not a big enough sample group to determine whether or not Americans in general have to wait. Some studies show otherwise.

quote:
Canada has, what, some 30 million odd citizens ? And you spent 170 billion last year on health-care. The United States has 330+ million citizens. Do the math.

Again, let me repeat, Americans are NOT against health-care reform. The problem is, what's being proposed is NOT reform. The premise of your argument is idiotic. If our health care is so shitty, why would we be against it being made better ?


Really? and yet with a much larger GDP we pay a higher % of that GDP for our health care.

Yes we need health care, hopefully one that works. But don't think our way of doing health care is worth a shit or that other people not wanting a certain health care plan means that plan is no good, Most people wouldn't know the difference and base everything they do on very fallacious reasoning.

quote:
Funny you should mention it. Recently a medication I was put on by my doctor started causing long and severe headaches. It was listed as a potential side effect and the drug information said to call my doctor if it happened. So I called my doctor and the next day, the NEXT friggin day, had an appointment to see him so we could try a different medication. I had NO wait time, I walked in a few minutes before my scheduled time and was promptly seen by my doctor. No wait. And I paid 20 bucks and my insurance, as usual, picked up the rest.


You are so sure that this is how it works for most in America. Also you are so sure that Canadians don't get anything like this, I've talked to Canadians that would tell you you;re wrong.


RE: I'm glad
By Reclaimer77 on 12/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: I'm glad
By SlyNine on 1/1/2010 11:55:49 PM , Rating: 2
I was just stating problems I have with your stance. You're afraid of government healthcare no matter the form it takes. Fine, but don't pretend ours is so much better then other countries, that's one area we fail at.

But I challenge that if it were done properly it could be great.

The problem BOTH of us have, is faith in our government to do it properly. In that area I'd agree with you. But that doesn't mean we don't need complete overhaul of our health care system.


RE: I'm glad
By eddieroolz on 1/3/2010 12:17:26 AM , Rating: 2
It has been said that people who resort to defaming others when posed with a valid reply, are merely attempting to mask their own lack of intelligence.

You fit the description nicely.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki