Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
Which part of it doesn't reflect reality? Disconnection of people accused of unauthorised downloading is definitely written into the law as one of the punishments.
|
This is literally true and, as far as I can tell (and that may not be very far), misleading at the same time.
The
Digital Economy Act does say that the British Secretary of State may draft an order to "limit internet access." But "no order is to be made . . . unless . . . a draft of the order has been laid before Parliament and approved by a resolution of each House." Maybe there is something about the British system I do not understand. Since it has to get through both houses of parliament regardless, does this mere mention of possible future parliamentary action change anything? I didn't think so.
Quote:
|
As are other "technical measures" that can be used as collective punishment if you can't prove your innocence.
|
If you are saying it is collective punishment because the whole family might lose internet access until another ISP was contracted, I think that every sanction imaginable, from execution to a $20 parking fine, is collective punishment. In the latter case, my money is equally the money of my wife and dependent son, so all three are equally punished if I am caught spending 3 hours in a 2 hour spot. In the former, well, depending on your views of the afterlife, my execution might be a neutral event for me, while I am arrogant enough to think it would be quite a severe punishment for my family.