[Metrobeans]

M89 - Internet Censorship and Copyright Infringement Motion, Ham and Cheese

This House disagrees with the recent ruling made by the High Court, instructing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to prevent their users from accessing the file-sharing site, The Pirate Bay. This House recognises the need to tackle copyright infringement, but also the need to provide compelling legal alternatives. This House disagrees with internet censorship on the premise that it restricts the freedom of the individual and is largely ineffective due to the availability of proxy servers.

[xXedixXx]

Aye.

[LPK]

Absolutely

[Rakas21]

In terms of the legal framework then i think that the ban is justified however as i do not support copyright infringement being enforced in relation to file sharing i support this motion.

In my opinion, record companies should face the fact that since Napster they should have adapted their business models, i have no objection to file sharing.

[MacDaddi]

Aye

[internetguru]

Agreed the government should not be enforcing laws for the benefits of certain industries.

[Lipvig]

Aye

[Moleman1996]

I'll either vote no or abstain on this one. Whilst I didn't really support the high court's ruling fully, Pirate Bay has the potential to cripple certain industries, and make smaller companies pay whilst big comapnies can just continue on as they will continue to make enough money. Whilst we aren't there to "enforce laws for certain businesses", we do need to ensure that they can survive, especially in the tough economic climate. We've already seen companies like MGM almost bankrupt, can we really afford to lose any in our country?

EDIT- To make my views more clear, I disagree with censorship, and feel we should be doing more to try and have the site regulated or closed down.

[Birchington]

Aye.

[Keckers]

(Original post by Moleman1996)
I'll either vote no or abstain on this one. Whilst I didn't really support the high court's ruling fully, Pirate Bay has the potential to cripple certain industries, and make smaller companies pay whilst big comapnies can just continue on as they will continue to make enough money. Whilst we aren't there to "enforce laws for certain businesses", we do need to ensure that they can survive, especially in the tough economic climate. We've already seen companies like MGM almost bankrupt, can we really afford to lose any in our country?

And I had you penned as a Thatcherite

Should we support a business that is facing failure because they couldn't adapt their business models? I'm pretty sure you don't think the 1970's British tax payer should have carried on paying through the nose for British coal companies.

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by Keckers)
And I had you penned as a Thatcherite

Should we support a business that is facing failure because they couldn't adapt their business models? I'm pretty sure you don't think the 1970's British tax payer should have carried on paying through the nose for British coal companies.

No they shouldn't, but those coal companies were failing due to inefficieny and unsustainability.

These companies are failing due to our inability to prevent what our own laws determine as illegal actions. They are failing because of the governments failure to enforce its laws. The coal companies were failing because they were uneconomical due to inefficiency and cost.

[RoryS]

Aye

[cl_steele]

Aye, long live The Pirate Bay!

[Metrobeans]

This is in cessation

[Metrobeans]

This has been withdrawn.