Skip to main content

1-20 of 164 results for subject:"Computer networks"

Subject X
Electronic publishing

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Electronic publishing (164)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

My Lords, while I can agree with some of the sentiments expressed in the suggested new clause, I do not think that in practice it adds anything to the Bill. I listened carefully to my noble friend Lord Whitty. I can understand the use of a bit of hyperbole to...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1284-5
House
House of Lords

I gather I am allowed to stand by way of explanation. My point is that as a House—and I certainly speak for myself—we have been subjected to an extraordinary degree of lobbying. The problem is that we have had no opportunity to look at that lobbying in a sensible and...

Member
Lord Puttnam (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1285
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I confess that I am one of these people who on occasion does not understand whether something that I want to do on the computer is legal or not. For example, I get e-mails from a company called 3B Software which offers for a small annual sum of...

Member
Lord Maxton (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1282-3
House
House of Lords

My Lords, very quickly, I, too, support this. The noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, made a very valid point. Things of this complexity should not just be suddenly presented here in Committee. Sometimes, even though we may not really disagree, we will appear to be confrontational because of positions we take...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1283-4
House
House of Lords

My Lords, perhaps I may add to what the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, has just said, because I basically agree with just about everything he said. I have been enormously influenced during the Bill’s passage by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, and by several things that the noble Lord, Lord...

Member
Lord Puttnam (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1281
House
House of Lords

My Lords, having had the privilege of sitting on these pre-legislative committees to which the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, referred, I agree absolutely with him. I also agree with the substance of the amendment, as noble Lords would expect, as I have added my name to it. The noble Lord,...

Member
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1281-2
House
House of Lords

17: Before Clause 4, insert the following new Clause— "Objective of sections 4 to 16 The objective of the measures in sections 4 to 16 is to move to a lawful means of access to copyright material for consumers and businesses and to reduce unlawful file-sharing and other forms of...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1279
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I had intended to make quite a substantive intervention on this matter, but in view of the time and the distinction of the audience—though not the volume of the audience—I shall try to keep it reasonably short. However, it goes to the heart of the Bill and my...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1279-81
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I am very appreciative of those who spoke in support of this amendment or something like it. The Government have to take on board the range of views which were expressed here. My noble friend Lord Puttnam is very wise to say that this should have been subject...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1286
House
House of Lords

There are aspects of my noble friend’s contribution that I probably could not help but agree with, but it is a fact of life: when we have legislation like this inevitably there will be lobbying. To conclude, we do not believe that this amendment will add to the Bill. The...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1285-6
House
House of Lords

We will educate him.

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1286
House
House of Lords

Exactly. My noble friend the Minister says that education is the first part of this Bill. I have said the Government have made improvements to the first part of the Bill—roughly Clauses 4 to 7—but it is still the first stage of an enforcement process. The first letter a subscriber...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1286-7
House
House of Lords

18: Clause 4, page 6, leave out lines 7 to 11 and insert— "( ) infringement of the owner’s copyright has taken place through a subscriber’s IP address"

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1287
House
House of Lords

My Lords, this is an even simpler approach to make the Government appear a little less harsh. As we move on to the first stage notification, the present text in Clause 4 states: ""This section applies if it appears to a copyright owner that …a subscriber to an internet access...

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1287
House
House of Lords

My Lords, there are a number of instances where the subscriber may well not be the infringer. For example, in the hotel industry, the hotel is a subscriber to an internet service. What happens if a number of different guests use the service to infringe copyright? The hotel will presumably...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1287-8
House
House of Lords

I have certainly had some letters about this because there are some concerns that this may turn hotels and other people into communication service providers, because they will have to start to monitor who is logged on and when and they will have to have software that does that. Does...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1288
House
House of Lords

My Lords, this amendment is an interesting one since it recognises that from the perspective of the copyright owner collecting the evidence to form the copyright infringement report, there is no way of knowing whether it is the subscriber apparently infringing copyright, somebody within their household or organisation, or somebody...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1288-9
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I understand what my noble friend is saying. However, the subscriber’s address identifies the potential infringement, so I am not entirely sure that his objection to my wording is correct. No doubt his technical advisers can advise him on a more apposite wording to replace the subscriber’s address....

Member
Lord Whitty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1289
House
House of Lords

I really must correct my noble friend. We are not implying guilt at all. We talk about an apparent infringement. We cannot indicate guilt because we do not know whether the subscriber was the person who perpetrated the act in question. I have made that clear and I wish that...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1289
House
House of Lords

19: Clause 4, page 6, line 22, after "gathered;" insert— "( ) is sent to the internet service provider within the period of 1 month beginning with the day on which the evidence was gathered;"

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
1 March 2010
Reference
717 c1289-90
House
House of Lords