UN Report States Disconnecting Repeat File Sharers Is A Breach Of Human Rights

If disconnecting repeat offenders from an Internet connection who are stealing content is a breach of Human Rights where does the right of content owners stand in relation to their human rights? So is the UN stating that breaking the law and stealing rights owner’s content whether that be; music, films, games or software is a Human Right? So this must now mean by default that the UN has legalised stealing content via file sharing and other similar technologies? No? Well then how can sanctions for repeat file-sharing offenders be a breach of human rights?

If you drive a car whilst drunk (over a certain permitted limit) you face sanctions that may include; a fine, incarceration and in some instances the taking away of your license and thereby your right to drive a car or motorcycle. If you lose all of the points you are credited with on your license you then automatically lose your license and hence right to drive. Using the logic of this UN report such actions would also be considered a breach of Human Rights even though the sovereign state concerned and its population believe such sanctions to be not only valid but critical to ensuring a stable and law abiding society.

If you lose your license you can still use public transport or a taxi to get to work or leisure activities. If ISP’s were to disconnect REPEAT file sharing offenders (the key word being repeat – as such persons who have been provided with prior warnings that they are committing illegal acts), the offender could no doubt still have access to Internet café’s and perhaps an Internet connection on their mobile phone where uploading and downloading large files becomes expensive.

As such, whilst their home Internet connection may have been disconnected these file sharing offenders would still have access to the Internet. If as a citizen of society you are warned that your conduct is in breach of the law and you continue to break the law then surely severe sanctions should be utilised to teach such offenders a lesson. What message are we as a society, sending file-sharing scum if it becomes a Human Right for them to steal? Because that is what in effect this UN Report is stating.

How is disconnecting someone from their internet service for not paying their bill any different to the actual ISP or Mobile operator disconnecting the same customer for the fact that despite numerous warnings they continue to break the law? This comment left on a post in the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper detailing the UN announcement states it all: “so would disconnecting a phone line for an unpaid bill, or disqualifying someone from driving constitute an infringement of their right to participate in society too? Once you break the law, you wear the consequences don’t you? And we aren’t talking about occasional or inadvertent infringements here”

A key question is where does responsibility for policing the Internet lie? The Government? ISPs, gatekeepers who charge for access to the information superhighway? Search engines who profit from driving traffic to offending P2P sites? Government regulation is and will continue to be behind the eight ball of where technology is positioned at any particular point in time.

Yes the concept of disconnecting voters is a very toxic political ball very few politicians are wiling to tackle as a group. Politicians are generally spineless and scared to make any decision based on principal. So forget about government regulation…ISPs are already using ‘deep packet inspection’ to check your traffic for child porn amongst many other things. Mobile operators, which are also sometimes consumers’ home broadband provider, already check the data you use via similar methods.

As soon as you jump on a Skype call via a mobile phone, operators drop your connection to 26kps to ensure the user experience is crap. This scenario is common practice especially with broadband providers who are also your land-line telephone service provider. So why are they unwilling to undertake similar action when it comes to repeat file sharing offenders? Quite simply it’s a money thing. ISP’s make too much money from servicing file-sharing offenders as customers to their Internet services. Why would they want to disconnect people from their networks? They would lose money, even though keeping these repeat file-sharing offenders connected to the Internet ensures content rights owners will continue to lose money because of the ISP’s actions. Or should I say refusal to act?

In terms of search engines profiting from facilitating copyright infringement – it is a breach of the law and hence illegal. Whilst we have not witnessed any test court cases from content owners in respect of search engines profiting of driving customers to file sharing sites, TMV predict we will see some in the next 24 months or so.

The key point I’m trying to get across here is that if content owners cannot sanction people who are repeatedly infringing on their copyrighted works then what rights of protection for their assets do they have in the eyes of the UN? What are the rights of artists to earn a fair and equitable income from their art? Is the UN stating there can be no sanctions for breaking the law? Because that is how their report reads…

I will end on this final note – a comment focusing on parenting rights and the Internet which was posted on the previously noted SMH story breaking the news regarding the UN report:

“So if I ground my kids from using the internet, I’m denying them their human rights?”

Some food for thought…

Related posts:

1. Google Attack’s File Sharing Sites Adsense Revenue
2. Four Reasons Why Fans Are File Sharing Your Music (That You Can Change)
3. The Clash of Cultures: The disconnect continues between rights owners and tech companies
4. Four Reasons Why Fans Are File-Sharing Your Music (And Why That Can’t Be Changed) Part II
5. Non-exclusivity, direct licensing and the granting of digital composition rights

Posted by Jakomi Mathews on Jun 6 2011. Filed under Digital, featured, Labels. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.