UK ISP Talk Talk Refuses to Comply with the BPI’s demands

The British ISP says no to becoming an "Internet Police"

The UK is likely to become the battlefield where ISPs on one side and the music and film industries on the other are about to cross swords over demands that they begin disconnecting customers accused of illegally sharing content online.

A firm refuse to give in to the pressure it has been constantly facing from the entertainment industry comes from the UK's 3rd largest ISP, TalkTalk (the home phone and broadband company from The Carphone Warehouse). It says it will not let itself be forced to "…impinge its customers' rights and restrict their freedom of use of the internet."

The fact is all the more praisable as TalkTalk is the first ISP to reject the British Phonographic Industry's (BPI) already notorious proposal "three-strikes-and-your-out"' scheme which prompts it to disconnect customers held guilty by the music industry as having shared illegally copyrighted material.

ZeroPaid reports that TalkTalk considers the policy proposed by the BPI as being "unreasonable" and "unworkable" and, moreover, it is determined not to spare any effort as to "…take every practical and legal step to defend its customers."

As part of their aggressive approach the BPI has been sending letters to all the major ISPs with the request to begin warning their customers that file-sharing will not be tolerated - and then disconnect the customers who disregard repeated warnings to cease this activity. It’s to be expected, however, that some ISPs such as Talk Talk don't embrace the prospect of acting as "internet police" and (the worst part), of losing otherwise loyal, paying customers.

Subsequent to receiving the letter from the BPI which "promised" legal action if he failed to conform to the BPI's demands within two weeks, Charles Dunstone, The Carphone Warehouse Group’s CEO, was all but happy with the letter and immediately replied with this press release:

"The music industry has consistently failed to adapt to changes in technology and now seeks to foist their problems on someone else," it continues. "Rather than threatening us, the BPI's time would be better spent facing up to the reality of our times and adapting its business model accordingly.”

The observation is rather accurate and the question rises -why should all the people of a country have their traffic monitored merely to ensure the profits of a private business after all?

The press release further reports -"TalkTalk has written to the BPI confirming that it will continue to protect its customers and under no circumstances will it voluntarily adopt a scheme that requires it to begin disconnections or sharing customer information with the music industry."

On the other hand the BPI,through Geoff Taylor, BPI Chief Executive, declares that it is not its wish to see Talk Talk acting as “internet police,” and doen’t ask the ISP to“impinge customers rights,” or “restrict freedom to use of the internet,” but only to "…act on information we provide to them."

How is that any different we ask? Who is going to decide if customers do get the benefit of a fair trial given that they are indeed accused of illegal file-sharing?

The response goes on:

At the heart of this issue is ensuring that creators are fairly rewarded in the digital age, and we passionately believe that working in partnership with ISPs to develop first class, safe, legal, digital music services is the way forward. But such a partnership can’t succeed if an ISP refuses to do anything to address the problem of illegal downloading on its network.

No need to say that the war between ISPs and the entertainment industry is about to burst out in Britain and what’s at stake here is in essence user privacy. We can only hope that customers will not receive the news about the BPI’s intention to watch over them closely passively and express their discontent loud and clear.

Wouldn’t it be better if the BPI put their efforts into the music industry's obvious need to adapt to the digital era? The question is rather rhetorical.