I couldn’t let the topic of Peter Mandelson’s new Digital Economy Bill go un-blogged, so rather than subject you to my incoherent ramblings, I thought I’d point legally-minded readers in the direction of Pangloss’s excellent analysis of the Bill as it stands.

The Bill has just been presented for its first reading, and despite the hysterics and some inaccurate reporting from the usual folk, there really is a lot to be concerned here about in terms of copyright policy and civil liberties. The Bill would allow the Secretary of State to make amendments to copyright law by Statutory Instrument, would mandate ISPs to notify (and possibly later disconnect) customers based on mere accusations of copyright infringement on their account, and a few other ill-thought-out measures.

I will be phoning my MP in the next few days to ensure that he votes the Bill down when it is presented in the Commons.

Those wishing to read more of the context of the Bill’s introduction can read Ars Technica’s background piece. You can read the Bill itself, as presented to the Lords, here.

…And on the subject of devolution vs. independence, what a political own-goal by the UK government:

The Faslane naval base on the Clyde is to become home to the UK’s entire nuclear-powered submarine fleet, the BBC understands.

An announcement on the future of the UK’s naval submarines is expected to be made in the House of Commons later.
It is understood that Trafalgar class submarines, currently based in Plymouth, will join the existing Vanguard fleet based at Faslane.
more

It’s a total gift to the SNP, who campaign against nuclear weapons being held in Scotland (and use planning powers to block the construction of new nuclear power stations).

This will come back to haunt Labour.

I don’t have anything particularly noteworthy to say about it, but I wanted to mark the fact that ten years ago, Scotland voted in the first ever election in the newly-reformed Scottish Parliament. I was too young to vote in the first election, but I now take a reasonably keen interest in Scottish Parliament politics.

Overall, I view devolution as a success, and I think that the political process has both encouraged and reflected the diverging political environment between Scotland and the UK as a whole. For me, it has meant a more open, honest political process, some big public health wins (such as the public smoking ban), and most importantly, a greater sense of confidence in Scotland. It has also had its faltering, embarrassing moments, and periods of total farce.

I am curious about further powers, something that almost everyone agrees the Parliament needs.

A referendum on independence for Scotland is planned for next autumn. The Scottish National Party presented the referendum bill against unfavourable parliamentary arithmetic in March (and failed), but it’s likely to re-introduce it at some point. One would hope that the effect of the opposition to the bill would be to add additional options (a three-way poll, including a ‘devolution max’ option as well as independence and the status quo) rather than to prevent the whole enterprise altogether.

Consider this an open thread. What does devolution mean to you? Would independence give Scotland the clout it needs? Is ‘devolution max’ or some kind of more entrenched federalism the way to go?

Statement A: The UK government are not planning to build a massive surveillance network to capture the traffic data of all internet users:

“GCHQ is not developing technology to enable the monitoring of all internet use and phone calls in Britain, or to target everyone in the UK,” the statement said. “Similarly, GCHQ has no ambitions, expectations or plans for a database or databases to store centrally all communications data in Britain.”

Statement A, revised: The UK government are not planning to build a massive surveillance network to capture the traffic data of all internet users.

Just not all of them simultaneously.

Or so they tell us. I feel so reassured :S

Nice work again, Ms. Reding:

UK laws protecting the privacy of people’s communications are inadequate, the European Commission has said. The Commission has launched a legal case against the UK over its implementation of European Union Directives.

The Commission’s investigation was sparked by outrage over trials by BT of a system which monitors web use and tries to match advertising to people’s perceived interests. The trials were done without BT customers’ knowledge or permission.

The Commission has investigated complaints made to it and to police and has found the UK’s laws inadequate in protecting the privacy of communications.

The UK.gov’s reaction to the Phorm fiasco, and its attitude to privacy in general, is best described by the following lolcat:

So I welcome this intervention, and hope that the UK gets slapped around the face and fined an enormous sum of money.

You can read the full article at out-law.com.