If you read the blogs and tweets over the past few days you could be forgiven for thinking the internet was going to be shut down and innocent people would be locked up because of the illegal downloading of their teenage children. The Digital Economy Act received Royal Assent on Thursday and became law.

In the words of the antagonists it is ‘farcical’, ‘draconian’, ‘dangerous’ and ‘undemocratic’, it will ‘violate consumers’ and it will turn the UK into ‘China in terms of internet censorship’. These sentiments were expressed in the House of Commons by one MP, surrounded by a band of acolytes. With precious little time for debate, this handful of MPs chose to demonstrate their lack of knowledge of the Bill and the provisions within it for dealing with online piracy. In response, the Minister reminded them that illegal filesharers ‘would receive a letter’.

No one pretends that this is an easy issue. For ten years, since the advent of Napster, people have got used to being able to go on to the Internet and take whatever music they want without paying. Indeed, a generation has grown up with this as the norm. The fact that it has become normal behaviour, though, does not make it right.

I am old enough to remember when drink driving was socially acceptable. That changed through concerted effort some years ago and there are other similar examples more recently. Illegal filesharing is in essence no different. It always has been a civil offence to steal online and, because the only remedy up until now was a court summons and settlement or damages for a four figure sum, dealing with it that way was not appealing to consumers, rightholders or Government. Another way had to be found.

Hence the Digital Economy Act. This was a genuine attempt by Government to deal with a major problem and to avoid the less palatable alternatives. Contrary to twitter wisdom, it was not rushed through. It was the subject of extensive discussion, followed by formal consultation on the draft Digital Britain proposals, further formal consultation on the Digital Britain Report, debate about the draft Bill published in November 2009 and then frenzied lobbying as it went through the Parliamentary processes in January, February and March. It is unfortunate it did not get as much time as is normally allocated to the House of Commons scrutiny stage but the online shouting was heard loud and clear.

It is worth noting that it shares that fate with the Finance Bill, rushed through on an even tighter timetable, but without any online outrage. No one seems to be objecting to that procedure for setting our tax rates for the next year. If the concern about Parliamentary concern was genuine, then the target of that concern should have been the Finance Bill.

So, why did the Digital Economy Act attract so much vitriol online? Thus far, it has been possible to take someone else’s work in the name of human rights, freedom of speech and creativity. Finally, that sham has been rumbled. It isn’t creative to copy someone else’s work. It isn’t freedom of speech to repeat what someone else has said. It isn’t a human right to steal.

In truth, the anger against the Digital Economy Act is that someone has dared to call an end to the free lunch on the Internet.

One Response to “The End of the Free Lunch”