Heres EXACTLY why we don't need government officials meddling with our internet acces

[IOWA]

The Right Honourable Stephen Timms is the UK's "Minister for Digital Britain." He's the guy behind the Digital Economy Bill, which makes the US DMCA look good by comparison. Seriously, this is some terrible, terrible lawmaking.

Here's what appears to be a letter the DigiMini sent to another MP, explaining why the Digital Economy Bill needs to go forward. It reads, in part, "Copyright owners are currently able to go on-line (sic), look for material to which they hold the copyright and identify unauthorised sources for that material. They can then seek to download a copy of that material and in so doing capture information about the source including the Intellectual Property (IP) address..."

If this letter is genuine (and it seems to be), it means that the guy who's in charge of Britain's digital future thinks that the "IP" in "IP address" stands for "Intellectual Property."

Thats right, Intellectual Property address. Well I guess if people in the UK avoid those their ok huh?

Minister for Digital Britain thinks an IP address is an "Intellectual Property address" - Boing Boing

 

[lekky]

I'd bet money that he just wrote "IP address" and then an editor/proofer saw that and thought "that acronym has't been used yet in this paper, we have to expand it on first use" and so they wrote it out long-form with what they understood it to mean.

I'd hope this is the cause of this... :/

 

[Pryomancer]

Oh god I just facepalmed everywhere.

 

[IOWA]

I'd hope this is the cause of this... :/

From what I hear, that actually said the phrase intellectual property address

 

[TheBrit]

An "out of touch" politician? Surely not!

One of my favourite quotes - unfortunately I can't remember which politician said it "I know all about modern technology and youth culture - I have an iPhone!" - what a prick.

They'll be voted out of office on May 6 so I'll not worry too much.

 

[Thefoodman52]

Nothing at all to see here....

 

[Eazail70x7]

I respond to those who troll by simply playing along with there little game and treating them nice. In that way they can say nothing bad. But This is merely a 1 on 1 example. I cant control other commenters.

I like to ask them questions too, many many questions lol

 

[IOWA]

I respond to those who troll by simply playing along with there little game and treating them nice. In that way they can say nothing bad. But This is merely a 1 on 1 example. I cant control other commenters.

I like to ask them questions too, many many questions lol

huh?

 

[IOWA]

With the UK's Digital Economy Bill rushed through with little real debate, it's worth looking at the ignorance behind those who supported and pushed through the bill. The more you look, the more you realize they didn't even understand the very basics of what they were talking about. As some have noted it was "a bill proposed by the unelected, debated by the ignorant and voted on by the absent."

And yes, it was proposed by the unelected Lord Mandelson, who has had to resign from the Government twice before due to accusations of corruption or influence peddling. And, of course, as many have noted, he only became interested in the whole Digital Economy Bill thing after vacationing with David Geffen, the former recording industry and movie industry mogul. After that, he suddenly pushed through the bill which went directly against the recommendations of the Gov't's own Digital Britain committee.

Then we get to the ignorant. Perhaps the most stunning is that, via Kevin Marks, we now learn that Digital Britain Minister Stephen Timms, who was in charge of pushing the bill through, didn't even understand what an "IP address" means. In a letter to an MP, he explained "IP" as an "Intellectual Property Address."

Now, yes, IP is used for both Intellectual Property and Internet Protocol, but if you actually know what you're talking about, you don't mix up the two. And Carlo points us to a message from Will Tovey noting that the Digital Economy Bill originally called an IP address an "Internet Portal" address. These are the people you want deciding the basic internet setup in your country?

And the folks involved in the debate don't seem to be too keen on understanding details either. During the debate, one MP, Michael Connarty had a bizarre take on the situation:
"People are not talking about co-operating and sharing their own thoughts and content, but are stealing someone else's content and sharing that. There is an Armageddon, which has partially arrived in Sweden, where the Pirate Party, whose leader is in jail, won seats in the European Parliament on the basis that everybody's work--including MP4's--should be free."
Can you count the number of mistakes there? Of course, the big one is the idea that the leader of the Pirate Party in Sweden is in jail. He's not. My guess is that Connarty thinks The Pirate Bay and The Pirate Party are the same (they're not even connected) and that the jail sentences handed down to some of the folks who worked on The Pirate Bay applied to The Pirate Party's head and that someone was actually in jail (they're not). But, you know, who needs details when you're just setting the framework for all internet connectivity and rights across your country?

And, finally, there are the absent. During the little time put forth for debate -- where many were vehemently opposed to the bill, notice that the House of Commons was basically empty:

But when it came time to vote? Suddenly over 200 MPs showed up. It makes you wonder why they're allowed to vote if they haven't even heard the debate. Especially when the guy in charge of convincing them to vote on this bill doesn't seem to even understand what's in it or what it will do.

 

[TheBrit]

And, finally, there are the absent. During the little time put forth for debate -- where many were vehemently opposed to the bill, notice that the House of Commons was basically empty:

But when it came time to vote? Suddenly over 200 MPs showed up. It makes you wonder why they're allowed to vote if they haven't even heard the debate. Especially when the guy in charge of convincing them to vote on this bill doesn't seem to even understand what's in it or what it will do.

It's called the party whip. MPs vote the way they are told to by the party leader - and usually do unless they have strong objections.

It was rushed through in the short time between announcing the General Election and dissolving (shutting down) parliament to allow campaigning to take place for the elections.

Rushed legislation is almost always bad legislation so I expect they'll have to have another look at this when the dust settles...and the current idiots are voted out of office.