BT and TalkTalk fail to quash Digital Economy Act

Internet service providers BT and TalkTalk have failed in an attract overturn the Digital Economy Act.

According to the Guardian, the general legal challenge to the act was thrown out on the Court of Appeal on all but one ground â€" that the govt couldn't make ISPs pay a proportion of the case fees attached to the act, which followed last year's judicial review of controversial anti-piracy legislation.

BT and TalkTalk had claimed the act's provisions were disproportionate and incompatible with EU laws on privacy, freedom of data and the responsibilities of ISPs.

They also said the act shouldn't be enforceable as it had not been submitted in draft form to the ecu Commission, as required.

The initial bill was undergone Parliament in April 2010 despite protests by the Open Rights Group and MPs similar to Tom Watson. The bill aimed to handle the difficulty of copyrighted material being freely available, while other sections placed a burden on ISPs to crack down on excessive file-sharing, which led TalkTalk to pledge to take legal action against music and movie companies that used the Digital Economy Act to achieve customer details.

The Federation Against Software Theft (FAST) however welcomed the scoop at the ground that it is going to help tackle copyright infringement online.

Julian Heathcote Hobbins, general counsel at FAST, said: “Under the terms of the Digital Economy Act, all ISPs will now must prepare to send warning letters to alleged illegal file downloaders and to maintain lists of repeat infringers that are requested under established legal procedures. Ofcom will publish the code at the practical application.

“As an issue of principle, it is a tremendous breakthrough and person who puts the provisions of the Digital Economy Act beyond this dog-fight, dispelling legal confusion.”

Peter Bradwell of the Open Rights Group said: “There is something the court cannot let us know: that this can be a good law. The dept for Culture, Media and Sport had no evidence once they wrote this act, with the exception of the numbers they got by more than one industry trade bodies. This can be a policy made on hearsay and assumptions, not proper facts or analysis.

“So significant problems remain. Publicly available WiFi could be put in peril. Weak evidence can be used to penalise people accused of copyright infringement, and folk should pay £20 for the privilege of protecting themselves against these accusations. The Government should correct these errors with a suitable, evidence-based review of the law.”