header-logo header-logo

31 July 2008
Issue: 7332 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Internet service providers warned over data protection

Legal news

Internet service providers should be aware of the data protection rights of individuals in their fight against illegal online data sharing, say experts.

Last week UK record labels association, the BPI, reached an agreement with Internet service providers (ISPs) and the government on measures to reduce illegal filesharing. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) places commitments on the recording industry and ISPs to develop consumer education programmes and legal online services allowing users to download legal content for free. In addition, “informative letters” are to be sent to users, identified by the BPI, whose accounts are suspected as being used illegally.

Penelope Thornton, associate in intellectual property, media and technology at Lovells, says the parties to the MOU will need to be careful about the operation of the Data Protection Act 1998 in any action taken against filesharers. “In some cases infringement of copyright by peer-to-peer file sharing can amount to a criminal offence, but personal data which relates to alleged criminal activity is ‘sensitive’ personal data under the Act and can normally be processed only with the explicit consent of the individual unless an appropriate exemption applies,” she says.

The MOU announcement was followed swiftly by the launch of a consultation from the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. The consultation includes proposals for legislative measures to address illicit filesharing, including granting personal data relating to IP addresses to rights holders on request.

Thornton continues, “In the hands of BPI the IP addresses may well not amount to personal data, but it is likely to be different in the case of the ISPs since they can match the address to a known individual.”

While no specific action was detailed for those that ignore the letters, the introduction of the MOU is seen as a response to government threats to legislate. Earlier this year the government suggested it was planning legislation to make it mandatory for ISPs to take action against those guilty of illegal sharing files. Thornton says the government prefers an industry led approach to the issue and that it has denied it will follow the proposed “graduated response” as in France. It may, however, seek alternative, technology based solutions. “Proposed technical measures to be discussed by ISPs, rights holders and Ofcom, such as filtering and marking content to help identify legitimate content, could be effective solutions. However they have been the subject of bitter negotiations between the ISPs and the rights owners for some time, without any resolution,” she says.

Issue: 7332 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll