UK Will Enforce Internet Filtering

Blocking access to websites has been widely discussed in the United States with the PROTECT IP act first proposed this past spring. However, with the Senate approving the legislation, it turned out that the US isn’t the only country discussing the possibility of filtering the web.

Some leaked document, labeled “confidential”, has been posted on Open Rights Group website. The document in question details a proposal by the entertainment industry to pressure UK broadband providers to take part in a voluntary website blocking agreement. Such system is described as an approach to preventing access to online services which are focused upon copyright violation.

Meanwhile, for the public there are many reasons to be concerned, the main one being that the proposal is being discussed behind closed doors. In fact, this is the same as when pro-copyright outfits were trying to push for many controversial provisions in ACTA. This time, everything is being planned behind closed doors as well. However, when Wikileaks published the documents relating to ACTA back in 2008, it caused a major outcry from the public and human rights groups, and the same is expected now with the filtering proposal.

Indeed, according to the leaked document, “voluntary” Great Firewall of Britain will be just the same. Criticisms of the current proposal are all the same as well: was the system so bad that the industry decided to hide it from the public?

In addition, there are more reasons to be concerned. For example, the document, whilst mentioning evidence gathering, “prior warning and liberty”, also notes a turn-around time which is quick enough for “live events”, as well as a balance between swift action and evidence. Anyway, it’s hard to imagine a technical solution enabling Internet service providers to enforce an effective block within the time scale of a “live event”, regardless of the time it takes a court to act.

The Open Rights Group was the first to express concern for this policy, saying that it sets out a dangerous voluntary scheme involving so-called “expedited court procedures” as well as a “balance” between evidence and speed of action. Meanwhile, definitions of which content should be blocked are quite scarce, and there are no references to exactly how filtering would work. In the end, everyone understands that ISPs won’t be able to really prevent Internet users from accessing blocked services, since all it really takes to access them is the right proxy.

ACTA Might Harm National Security

The letter sent by the Department of Homeland Security said that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement turned out to be a potential national security risk back three years ago. 

One of the outfits following the ACTA development has received very interesting information over the agreement way back in 2008. When the treaty was first discovered, it was the worst that ever happened to copyright legislation. The agreement included a global “three-strikes” regime, which demanded that all digital devices including laptops and MP3 players be seized at borders and checked for infringing content. Moreover, it featured DMCA-style anti-circumvention provisions, and any negotiations over the treaty were entirely secret. It actually became known thanks to Wikileaks, which blew the lid off the treaty.

Ever since the information leaked online, there were many criticisms of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, one of them being that it represents a national security risk due to containing a “three-strikes” provision. France, which has already introduced the similar regime, was “yelled” at by the NSA for that. That’s what Homeland Security pointed out back then.

It turned out that the Department of Homeland Security sent a letter to the US ambassador, where it expressed concerns over the treaty negotiations. More specifically, the concern was about border security, or the priority IP Enforcement had as compared to other national security threats. The Department of Homeland Security asked where all the extra resources needed for seizing and searching all staff at borders would come from. What is more important, the letter was sent before the stock market crashed and the country considered tightening the belt. You can imagine what costs it would be today, if 3 years ago it was a matter of concern already. How does this relate to national security? Easy. Now ACTA would demand Homeland Security to do more with less resources, and if it tries to allocate all its resources to searching though every mobile phone and MP3 player at borders, then national security would be put at risk.

In other words, it looks like there’s a choice between huge national security risks and counterfeiters. That would be weird if the governments prefer corporate interests to issues of national security, but this war on copyright infringement is really getting out of hand.