I actually agree somewhat with this, that's why i think we would also need some protections against stupidity. Logic and reason, education and self development of the people must happen alongside this sort of change.
Digital Economy Bill passed through the Lords
- Thread starter Westyfield2
- Start date
I actually agree somewhat with this, that's why i think we would also need some protections against stupidity. Logic and reason, education and self development of the people must happen alongside this sort of change.
This seems to apply to most of the MP's as well...
Ahh so free votes for all except those deemed unworthy?
Or Voting for all but only on issues where you can't hurt yourselves or each other?
Only the ones you've never heard of
The rest make a lot of money
I imagine a network that becomes more ordered and reasoned as it goes mainstream, everyone can vote and contribute but logic and reason will win out if it's truly for the greater good, it can't be worse on such large scales than it is now with small groups plotting and paying off weak minded individuals in positions of power, surely?
average politician is aswell.
dont know why they had clueless sheeps voting for and against something when nearly all of them didnt understand what it was.
big companies say its bad so it must be
To be honest, I don't think I'd want "in-depth"* knowledge of networking and filesharing to be a requirement for an MP. Those that knew what they were talking about made themselves heard during the readings, unfortunately just not loud enough for their parties to listen.average politician is aswell.
dont know why they had clueless sheeps voting for and against something when nearly all of them didnt understand what it was.
big companies say its bad so it must be
*I say "in-depth" because although there isn't anything particularly complicated involved just as many people seem to be confused on here about the different bits of it as MPs were.
I actually think that 20,000 people writing in represents a much larger group that are unaware of this bill and the effects it will have on them. I think that 20,000 people making an effort to write to their MP's is pretty good going.
People are passionate about this as it WILL affect them, as the government have stayed out of it and now using an sledgehammer to crack a chestnut.
PLEASE write to your MP's
Takes literally 5 minutes of your time to go direct to them.
http://www.writetothem.com/
If I can get a personal response from David Cameron during his election campaign.....writing to your MP will help and will be heard
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 1,872
- Location
- hell
Several reasons why people pirate stuff
- easier to get it pirate than going to the shop
- cheaper (free)
- less restrictions on usage
Now that i'm employed, I actually buy stuff. When I was at uni nobody paid for anything, simply because nobody had cash. Getting rid of piracy wouldn't have changed that.
Since spotify came out, I haven't downloaded one illegal MP3 (I pay for a premium membership also)!
If they had a TV service that meant I could watch American Shows as and when I please for say £10-15/month, I wouldn't pirate any TV either.
As for software, I can't think of the last program I had to download illegally. I'd happily pay for any Microsoft product nowadays. I guess the only thing worth pirating is something like Photoshop (which the majority of people who download it barely use).
They need to make it less hassle to get stuff legally, than it is to get stuff illegally. Spotify is far too simple to use to be bothered enough to download Mp3s...one of the key reasons I pay for using it.
The whole digital rights bill is a absolute joke, really disgusted by it and I hope piracy continues to thrive.
- easier to get it pirate than going to the shop
- cheaper (free)
- less restrictions on usage
Now that i'm employed, I actually buy stuff. When I was at uni nobody paid for anything, simply because nobody had cash. Getting rid of piracy wouldn't have changed that.
Since spotify came out, I haven't downloaded one illegal MP3 (I pay for a premium membership also)!
If they had a TV service that meant I could watch American Shows as and when I please for say £10-15/month, I wouldn't pirate any TV either.
As for software, I can't think of the last program I had to download illegally. I'd happily pay for any Microsoft product nowadays. I guess the only thing worth pirating is something like Photoshop (which the majority of people who download it barely use).
They need to make it less hassle to get stuff legally, than it is to get stuff illegally. Spotify is far too simple to use to be bothered enough to download Mp3s...one of the key reasons I pay for using it.
The whole digital rights bill is a absolute joke, really disgusted by it and I hope piracy continues to thrive.
You're completely correct here, not even everyone who cares about it will write to their MP, 20k is a LOT of people to write to their MP's about something. My MP has replied twice, before the vote and after, saying that he basically abstained because he was towing the party line but was against some of the clauses. It's a weak reply but a reply. Wish I had a better MP :/
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 1,786
- Location
- wakefield
i wrote to my mp and got a letter back , my mum saw it and panic'd haha
no but surely you want want the people voting on something to actually understand what it is they are voting for, all the record companies and movie studios were probably hoping enough people who wouldnt understand would vote for it anyway
yeah, that's fine, they should have had a lot more explanation and things made clearer to them. But it's nothing to do with being a stupid MP which was the suggestion I was responding to.
The worst bit for me was that Timms and others arguing in favour of it were clueless, they didn't stand up to any interrogation but because of the time scale everything still went through
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,376
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
What an utterly silly statement.
The fact 20,000 complained is rather astonishing. You don't have a control set. I'll give you a clue, it isn't 44000000-20000.
Even opponents like me haven't yet find the time to pen a letter - which I'm doing now.
Post it here when you're done. Is it going to your MP?
there are quite a lot of templates posted already, although admittedly they were before it went through.
Talking of silly statements the original quote was 10,000 people wrote to their MPs (not 20,000) and questioned how that was that democracy.
Given that only 10,000 actively asked their MPs to oppose the bill as is their right and 44million either approved, didn't know or didn't care I'd suggest that is in fact exactly democracy in action. Unless of course you are suggesting that the opinions of <0.001% of eligible UK voters should hold veto on any bill put before parliament if it doesn't suit their particular interests?
You may not like it but was a perfectly legal and easy way for the majority of UK voters to make their views known to their MPs asking them to vote against the bill or justify their reasons for supporting it.
Voter support, apathy or even ignorance let this atrocious piece of legislation go through. But that is democracy and lets face it, this wasn't an obscure bill on a minor piece of legislation, it had plenty of publicity and debate on the news and across the internet.
Can I suggest that instead of misquoting Lord Splodge (the OP I responded to) and puerile jabs like "that's a silly statement" and "I'll give you a clue" your outrage would have had more credibility if you'd bothered to campaign against the bill before it was passed, not just grumble on an Internet forum once it had (barring the queens consent) become law.
http://debillitated.heroku.com/
20,000 letters, that's an average of 30 letters on the subject to every single MP, that is a big response to something, no matter what your opinion says. It is a significant enough number that more deliberation should have been required before it was passed. Everyone involved knew this, yet it managed to get through because it was being pushed by the parties as a whole and so except lib-dems the only noes were mp's who had actually bothered to look into it.
time scale was probably short on purpose lets decide something which is massively importaint within 2 hours
most of them wouldnt have realised how importaint it were and they probably still dont.
i dont read news papers so i dont know if any of them were trying to demonise or not but seeing as they are all about money and worried about people not buying newspapers anymore because its an outdated business model just like dvd's, blurays and music cds i expect they were in favour of a law that one day might protect the news articles people pay for online