http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14372698
This seems remarkably sensible for a change. I'm not British and I don't know the intricacies of your copyright laws, but what do you guys think about this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14372698
This seems remarkably sensible for a change. I'm not British and I don't know the intricacies of your copyright laws, but what do you guys think about this?
It's probably because it was far too costly.
Woo there taking down two stupid laws that pretty much everyone was breaking anyway.
Pretty much this. The laws were so stupid they couldn't not scrap them.Originally Posted by Xercies
Again, this, but a victory for freedom of speech, none the less.
"It's not just a fact, it's cold, hard speculation."
Unless I'm misreading this, it looks like they're specifically dropping the part of the DEA that concerns blocking access to websites, and they are doing this because it's unnecessary and an organisation won a case to have a website blocked regardless of the DEA.
In the past week, the Motion Picture Association - a group representing film studios - successfully applied for a court injunction requiring BT to block access to an infringing website called Newzbin2.
The action was taken without using the Digital Economy Act, prompting some observers to question the need for the legislation.
Yeah, this doesn't sound like good news to me at all. They don't need the other law as the BT case has 'opened new avenues'.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
