The government should encourage self-moderated forums

Many site users here including myself have had posts removed by the moderators for in our view inadequate reasons, based on other protests I've seen here.

Moderated forums in general present a problem, because the moderator is constantly asked to take sides – i.e. decide between somebody's right to post, and the rights of somebody complaining about a post.

The best solution would be SELF-MODERATED forums, such as exist on the BBC 606 site, so that whoever starts a thread can delete abusive comments on it if they please, as the BBC put it "are in control of their space."

Because otherwise we just have the constant DENIAL OF FREE SPEECH.

To put it simply, I want the right to say what I want on MY idea page without being abused, and I give in return the right to everybody else to do the same, say what they like on THEIR PAGE, and delete any comments they find abusive.

The tag system on this site is for example a major source of ANONYMOUS ABUSE, and once again, should be under the control of whoever starts the page, unless the site administrators are quite happy about the poster being abused, as appears to be the case on this site to date.

Why is this idea important?

Many site users here including myself have had posts removed by the moderators for in our view inadequate reasons, based on other protests I've seen here.

Moderated forums in general present a problem, because the moderator is constantly asked to take sides – i.e. decide between somebody's right to post, and the rights of somebody complaining about a post.

The best solution would be SELF-MODERATED forums, such as exist on the BBC 606 site, so that whoever starts a thread can delete abusive comments on it if they please, as the BBC put it "are in control of their space."

Because otherwise we just have the constant DENIAL OF FREE SPEECH.

To put it simply, I want the right to say what I want on MY idea page without being abused, and I give in return the right to everybody else to do the same, say what they like on THEIR PAGE, and delete any comments they find abusive.

The tag system on this site is for example a major source of ANONYMOUS ABUSE, and once again, should be under the control of whoever starts the page, unless the site administrators are quite happy about the poster being abused, as appears to be the case on this site to date.

Fix insufficient privilages issue

This is the usual half-arsed foray into IT that we expect from the government. On this occasion, unlike the usual 'lets have an enormous data base that we can't secure or even make work properly', or the 'I know, I'll do a video blog, that'll conect me wiv da kids on da street', it is actually a good idea.

Unfortunately, as is usual, out of all the competent and efficient possible suppliers out there the government seem to have found the rubbish.

There are millions of discussion boards on the internet and the vast majority of them work, it's not rocket science.

Why is this idea important?

This is the usual half-arsed foray into IT that we expect from the government. On this occasion, unlike the usual 'lets have an enormous data base that we can't secure or even make work properly', or the 'I know, I'll do a video blog, that'll conect me wiv da kids on da street', it is actually a good idea.

Unfortunately, as is usual, out of all the competent and efficient possible suppliers out there the government seem to have found the rubbish.

There are millions of discussion boards on the internet and the vast majority of them work, it's not rocket science.

Amend the Digital Economy Act 2010

To reduce financial damage caused by the unlawful downloading of movies, music etc ask each internet customer to pay perhaps £100 per year to download anything that is on offer from the internet. This would be collected by the internet service provider and passed on.

Why is this idea important?

To reduce financial damage caused by the unlawful downloading of movies, music etc ask each internet customer to pay perhaps £100 per year to download anything that is on offer from the internet. This would be collected by the internet service provider and passed on.

Make jailbreaking legal

Today, the USA made Jailbreaking legal. This allows people who own mobile phones to remove the manufacturer's restrictions. This means they can install their own applications.

The UK needs to do the same.  We need to make Jailbreaking legal.

Why is this idea important?

Today, the USA made Jailbreaking legal. This allows people who own mobile phones to remove the manufacturer's restrictions. This means they can install their own applications.

The UK needs to do the same.  We need to make Jailbreaking legal.

Remove threat to FM radio

In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.

Why is this idea important?

In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.

Drive to get all UK citizens online by 2012

This is a government drive to get everyone in the UK online by the year 2012, the government should realise that not everyone in the UK wants to get use the internet. 'Up to ten million people in the UK have never used the internet, according to figures from Race Online 2012.' Not everyone chooses to embrace the internet and they should be free to make their own decisions about whether they get online or not.

Why is this idea important?

This is a government drive to get everyone in the UK online by the year 2012, the government should realise that not everyone in the UK wants to get use the internet. 'Up to ten million people in the UK have never used the internet, according to figures from Race Online 2012.' Not everyone chooses to embrace the internet and they should be free to make their own decisions about whether they get online or not.

Clean up the Internet

The government should require Internet Service Providers (ISP) in the UK to apply for a licence to operate in the UK. There should be a hefty licence fee and stiff conditions of conduct. These conditions must include the duty of the ISP to screen spam, viruses, pornography and other undesirable email and web sites.

Why is this idea important?

The government should require Internet Service Providers (ISP) in the UK to apply for a licence to operate in the UK. There should be a hefty licence fee and stiff conditions of conduct. These conditions must include the duty of the ISP to screen spam, viruses, pornography and other undesirable email and web sites.

Amendments to Digital Economy Act 2010

At the current moment parts the the Digital Economy Act 2010 introduced by Lord Peter Mandelson on 8th of April which  is simply unenforceable and too draconian in statue to implerment properly.  The following changes which I propose would benefit not only Internet providers but aswell compensate Industries who lose said money to digital piracy. 

Proposel

  • The right to download copyrighted work for home use, educational purposes without any economical benefit or the intent to redistribute.
  • Creation of a new independant government body of which handles copyright on digital and internet use of said copyrighted materials and which collects payment of monies collected from a new tax .
  • A marginal tax all Internet providers would charge on top of all subcriptions made and passed to the new independant government body who then distributes the monies to the various lobbies who own the said copyright.

Why is this idea important?

At the current moment parts the the Digital Economy Act 2010 introduced by Lord Peter Mandelson on 8th of April which  is simply unenforceable and too draconian in statue to implerment properly.  The following changes which I propose would benefit not only Internet providers but aswell compensate Industries who lose said money to digital piracy. 

Proposel

  • The right to download copyrighted work for home use, educational purposes without any economical benefit or the intent to redistribute.
  • Creation of a new independant government body of which handles copyright on digital and internet use of said copyrighted materials and which collects payment of monies collected from a new tax .
  • A marginal tax all Internet providers would charge on top of all subcriptions made and passed to the new independant government body who then distributes the monies to the various lobbies who own the said copyright.

Digital Economy Act (Unscrupilous Lawyers)

Hi,

I have been a victim of mis-identification due to the misuse of this proposed law (which has not been sanctioned / implimented yet).

I have been accused of downloading an MP3 Song, and am in litigation procedings with a company called ACS LAW after being blatantly accused of this transaction, and they are trying to blackmail me into paying them £295.00, using my IP address as proof, this can easily be faked, of altered by someone with access to hacking knowlege, or my wireless has possibly been "piggybacked", or someone hid behind a proxy to perform this.

I have the beckground knowlege to know that this accusation would be unsound in any court in the UK at the moment, and am fighting this with a denial letter, if necessary with legal solicitors on my side, who's advice I have since sought, that specialise in IP dealings (Intellectual Property), but fear that the Digital Economy Act's introduction will open the door for many more unsavoury law firms that extort money out of fear of litigation without proof.

Why is this idea important?

Hi,

I have been a victim of mis-identification due to the misuse of this proposed law (which has not been sanctioned / implimented yet).

I have been accused of downloading an MP3 Song, and am in litigation procedings with a company called ACS LAW after being blatantly accused of this transaction, and they are trying to blackmail me into paying them £295.00, using my IP address as proof, this can easily be faked, of altered by someone with access to hacking knowlege, or my wireless has possibly been "piggybacked", or someone hid behind a proxy to perform this.

I have the beckground knowlege to know that this accusation would be unsound in any court in the UK at the moment, and am fighting this with a denial letter, if necessary with legal solicitors on my side, who's advice I have since sought, that specialise in IP dealings (Intellectual Property), but fear that the Digital Economy Act's introduction will open the door for many more unsavoury law firms that extort money out of fear of litigation without proof.

Remove Internet Censorship by the State

To remove censorship of internet content.

Whether I look at extreme right or left wing political literature, or details of how to grow cannabis, or videos of people being killed, the actual act of my clicking hasn't harmed anyone.

Production of the material may still be illegal, following the advice in the material may still be illegal, but the act of clicking and typing shouldn't be.

Why is this idea important?

To remove censorship of internet content.

Whether I look at extreme right or left wing political literature, or details of how to grow cannabis, or videos of people being killed, the actual act of my clicking hasn't harmed anyone.

Production of the material may still be illegal, following the advice in the material may still be illegal, but the act of clicking and typing shouldn't be.

TV LICENSING, BRING IT IN TO THE 21st CENTURY

why do we still have TV licence detection vans?

Very silly 70's idea, off little men knocking on doors checking if you are glued to the goggle box, come on, best just assume each household has one, it would then be up to the proprietor to prove otherwise ( I have just saved probably £30 off a licence)?

Also why are TV Licensing allowed to charge £5 per year if you give them the easy regular payment option of DIRECT DEBIT, we are making their payments easier, even COUNCIL TAX dont charge you and thats at least 10 times dearer, has no one else noticed?

RIP OFF BRITAIN AGAIN!!

Why is this idea important?

why do we still have TV licence detection vans?

Very silly 70's idea, off little men knocking on doors checking if you are glued to the goggle box, come on, best just assume each household has one, it would then be up to the proprietor to prove otherwise ( I have just saved probably £30 off a licence)?

Also why are TV Licensing allowed to charge £5 per year if you give them the easy regular payment option of DIRECT DEBIT, we are making their payments easier, even COUNCIL TAX dont charge you and thats at least 10 times dearer, has no one else noticed?

RIP OFF BRITAIN AGAIN!!

Internet freedom is crucial for democracy

The Internet was built as a tool for co-operation and has so far survived multiple attempts at regulation and control for political, idealogical and financial reasons . Decisions on issues limiting the freedom of users need to be public, informed and properly debated. Vested interests struggling to retain out-moded business models (I'm thinking of the music industry in particular) should be informed that they cannot have it both ways: if the market says that consumers (meaning us mugs) have found a more desirable way of doing things then the suppliers must adapt or perish, and that the public purse is not there to prop them up. It's a free market, isn't it, or is there something I've missed? Also government should not use the opportunity offered in order to impose political control at the expense of legal control.

Why is this idea important?

The Internet was built as a tool for co-operation and has so far survived multiple attempts at regulation and control for political, idealogical and financial reasons . Decisions on issues limiting the freedom of users need to be public, informed and properly debated. Vested interests struggling to retain out-moded business models (I'm thinking of the music industry in particular) should be informed that they cannot have it both ways: if the market says that consumers (meaning us mugs) have found a more desirable way of doing things then the suppliers must adapt or perish, and that the public purse is not there to prop them up. It's a free market, isn't it, or is there something I've missed? Also government should not use the opportunity offered in order to impose political control at the expense of legal control.

CyberCrime

We need a more definative law on cyber-crime and cyber-terrorism. At the moment the rules are blurred based on the detachment from social norm the internet provides. Considering this, I propose that the following be considered cyber-crime:

 

– Soliciting Miners

– Identity Theft

– Rick Rolling (Possibly the worst, my son told me he was 'rick rolled' at school by one of his teachers, but the police would do nothing.)

 

Any other suggestions from people about online acts which should be considered cyber crime?

Why is this idea important?

We need a more definative law on cyber-crime and cyber-terrorism. At the moment the rules are blurred based on the detachment from social norm the internet provides. Considering this, I propose that the following be considered cyber-crime:

 

– Soliciting Miners

– Identity Theft

– Rick Rolling (Possibly the worst, my son told me he was 'rick rolled' at school by one of his teachers, but the police would do nothing.)

 

Any other suggestions from people about online acts which should be considered cyber crime?

Repeal the Digitial Economy Bill – new thinking required on filesharing

The Digital Economy Bill should be repealed for two reasons:

1) it is rushed and vague, and did not receive appropriate review in order to fully assess the validity and impact of it's unclear proposals

2) it representatives 20th century thinking being applied to a 21st century way of life, we should be be innovative and forward thinking in this matter

Why is this idea important?

The Digital Economy Bill should be repealed for two reasons:

1) it is rushed and vague, and did not receive appropriate review in order to fully assess the validity and impact of it's unclear proposals

2) it representatives 20th century thinking being applied to a 21st century way of life, we should be be innovative and forward thinking in this matter

Scrap the Digital Economy Act

To remove this bill altogether, it gives the Goverment too many powers to just turn off Broadband connections or even to block websites they do not like!

It takes away the freedom of access for Internet, and infringes upon our Human Rights.

Why is this idea important?

To remove this bill altogether, it gives the Goverment too many powers to just turn off Broadband connections or even to block websites they do not like!

It takes away the freedom of access for Internet, and infringes upon our Human Rights.

Scrap the Digital Economy Bill

To remove this bill altogether, it gives the Goverment too many powers to just turn off Broadband connections or even to block websites they do not like!

It takes away the freedom of access for Internet, and infringes upon our Human Rights.

Why is this idea important?

To remove this bill altogether, it gives the Goverment too many powers to just turn off Broadband connections or even to block websites they do not like!

It takes away the freedom of access for Internet, and infringes upon our Human Rights.

Replace the Digital Economy Act

The Digital Economy Act fails to recognise the importance of the data access to the individual and groups as the means to be productive and co-operative in society and the economy by seeking to control and monitor activity from the centre.

Why is this idea important?

The Digital Economy Act fails to recognise the importance of the data access to the individual and groups as the means to be productive and co-operative in society and the economy by seeking to control and monitor activity from the centre.

Rethink the Digital Economy Act

To ban certain websites or to restrict peoples access to the internet is not going to solve copyright infringment ,people will find another way round this .. what needs to happen is sites need to be created that charge a low monthly fee that is passed on the the record/film industry .     

Why is this idea important?

To ban certain websites or to restrict peoples access to the internet is not going to solve copyright infringment ,people will find another way round this .. what needs to happen is sites need to be created that charge a low monthly fee that is passed on the the record/film industry .     

Repeal Digital Economy Act

While I agree that there should be *some* measures taken to limit or punish those who use the internet to steal, I feel that the current bill is highly flawed and has removed civil liberties that should remain, even if a household is caught.

As it stands, the Digital Economy Bill is too broad. It targets the bill payer of the family instead of the individual culprits. As a family is composed of many differing age groups and incomes, all using the same wireless or wired internet, it shouldn't be right that a mother, who does not use the internet, is punished because her son downloads an album illegally. 

There is also an issue that there is currently no way to go to trial over these allegations. As I understand the bill, you receive a letter from your ISP (internet service provider) saying you've been caught and either have to pay a fine or lose your connection. There seems to be no way to have a fair trial on these allegations, which is unrealistic, as many peer-to-peer sharing or torrenting CAN be used for legal practices, such as sharing large amounts of data through a business. However, they may flag up as illegal sharing and lead whole families into bankruptcy. 

Instead, Government should focus on educating the youth and fair warning systems. This would allow the parents to talk to their children if their household is warned.

I also feel that there should be technological experts on hand to give fully educated guidance to government, as there has been a lack of understanding in how the Internet works from both the House of Lords and House of Commons whenever the issue of the Internet has been raised. 

Why is this idea important?

While I agree that there should be *some* measures taken to limit or punish those who use the internet to steal, I feel that the current bill is highly flawed and has removed civil liberties that should remain, even if a household is caught.

As it stands, the Digital Economy Bill is too broad. It targets the bill payer of the family instead of the individual culprits. As a family is composed of many differing age groups and incomes, all using the same wireless or wired internet, it shouldn't be right that a mother, who does not use the internet, is punished because her son downloads an album illegally. 

There is also an issue that there is currently no way to go to trial over these allegations. As I understand the bill, you receive a letter from your ISP (internet service provider) saying you've been caught and either have to pay a fine or lose your connection. There seems to be no way to have a fair trial on these allegations, which is unrealistic, as many peer-to-peer sharing or torrenting CAN be used for legal practices, such as sharing large amounts of data through a business. However, they may flag up as illegal sharing and lead whole families into bankruptcy. 

Instead, Government should focus on educating the youth and fair warning systems. This would allow the parents to talk to their children if their household is warned.

I also feel that there should be technological experts on hand to give fully educated guidance to government, as there has been a lack of understanding in how the Internet works from both the House of Lords and House of Commons whenever the issue of the Internet has been raised. 

Repeal the Digital Economy Act 2010

This act needs to be repealed because many innocent households will have their internet disconnected. After all many peolpe have no password to access there wi-fi that means anyone can use your internet for downloading or anything else with out you knowing. Alos millions of kids are downloading illigal films and music without their parents knowing is that really so bad, record companys will still be making millions wheather they do it or not.

Why is this idea important?

This act needs to be repealed because many innocent households will have their internet disconnected. After all many peolpe have no password to access there wi-fi that means anyone can use your internet for downloading or anything else with out you knowing. Alos millions of kids are downloading illigal films and music without their parents knowing is that really so bad, record companys will still be making millions wheather they do it or not.

Amendment to the Digital Economy Bill

When anyone buys new computers, mobiles, or electronic equipment, Rory Cellan-Jones should come round and explain, in detail, how it works, this will save us from having lots of instruction booklets. Rory can have a copy of each, notified who brought what, he can the read the booklet and pop round and set it all up.

Why is this idea important?

When anyone buys new computers, mobiles, or electronic equipment, Rory Cellan-Jones should come round and explain, in detail, how it works, this will save us from having lots of instruction booklets. Rory can have a copy of each, notified who brought what, he can the read the booklet and pop round and set it all up.