Analysis: SOPA protest reveals scale of UK discontent

The debate over how to protect copyright in the digital age has scaled new heights of rancour, with neither side showing any sign of backing down

Wikipedia’s recent 24-hour blackout in protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) in the US was a potent reminder that the many issues of how to appropriately regulate the internet continue to vex ISPs, content creators and policy makers on this side of the pond as well.

The Digital Economy Act (DEA), a bill that was rushed through parliament in the dying days of the last Labour government, is core to the ongoing controversy, due to it including provisions for website blocking. These provisions are supported by copyright holders, such as the Motion Picture Association of America, but are contested by digital campaigners who claim they will result in the internet being policed.

ISPs such as BT and TalkTalk also object to being made responsible for blocking the copyright-infringing sites - an obligation that they argue could sometimes be technically difficult to fulfil and carries the risk of financial penalties.

Analysis: SOPA protest reveals scale of UK discontent

However, these website-blocking provisions were brought into question after an Ofcom review in February last year suggested they were not workable, which resulted in the government not pushing through further legislation designed to bring them into full effect.

Copyright infringement

The government is in talks with industry bodies about an alternative plan to tackle the issue of copyright infringement. One of the bodies involved in these talks is the Open Rights Group, which believes the row in the US over SOPA and PIPA is a timely reminder that the copyright debate in the UK is far from over and may still be influenced by developments in Washington.

“There are two reasons why Open Rights Group is supporting a protest aimed at US laws. First, the overly broad definitions and wording of the bills put any websites at risk of action from US authorities,” wrote Open Rights Group campaigner Peter Bradwell in a blog. “Second, we face many of the issues with these copyright-related bills here in the UK: inappropriate enforcement measures - in particular website blocking; overly broad or vague definitions and wording; and weaknesses in due process and redress.”

Gartner analyst Robin Wilton said SOPA, PIPA and the DEA are facing criticism because the legislative process within which they were formed does not support rational policy that can be applied to content in a digital era. “Watching the Digital Economy bill be passed into an act was quite a shocking experience,” he said.

“I think only six per cent of MPs actually bothered to turn up to vote on it, and of that six per cent only three MPs actually said anything coherent or technically sensible. For instance, one MP thought an IP address meant an intellectual property address.

“Also, the MPs that turned up and objected to the bill went ahead and voted for it anyway, because that’s what the party line at the time was and they were being told from above how to vote.”

Wilton argued that for the DEA to become more coherent and less controversial it needs to be targeted directly at criminals, rather the entire population. “SOPA and PIPA are similar to the Digital Economy Act in that they have sweeping powers that could really be used for any sort of website blocking and censorship. The [bills’ supporters have] said they will only go after the worst offenders of file sharing and copyright violation, but the laws could be used for anything, really,” said Wilton.

Although website blocking may go against the principles of a free internet, there remains the real problem of copyright holders losing out on profits through piracy. This raises the question: is there an alternative?

Security gaps

Alan Rodgers, an analyst at Ovum, believes the solution may lie in addressing the gaps in the security architecture of the internet. Rodgers argued that if there were increased pressure to implement effective user authentication online, where ISPs knew who was accessing what sites and consuming what material, this would allow governments to target the real offenders.

“In the long term, internet architecture specialists need to do more to put in stronger user authentication, and tie that to entitlements on the web. A website can set up a firewall, and users have to register to pay for content, but that’s done on a case-by-case basis. It’s certainly not everywhere,” said Rodgers.

“However, this would also be hugely controversial as there is an argument that it infringes on people’s privacy. It would also be extremely complex and expensive.”

In the meantime, those forces calling for website blocking, such as the Motion Picture Association of America, are unlikely to throw in the towel just yet. “Opponents [to blocking] have won an initial skirmish, but those seeking to control and fragment the internet have tremendous resources and are willing to persist over an extended period of time,” said Ray Valdes, an analyst at Gartner.

“If not this month, then next month. If not this year, then next year. This will happen unless opponents galvanise into an organised, long-lasting political force.”