BPI has written up their own suggestions on their website to combat the illegal music sharing dilemma that goes to outline the idea of getting Internet Service Providers to undertake a three strikes system. That is, all those people that currently partake in downloading illegal files will be given two warnings from their ISP before a third line of action will be taken to block their internet access.

It’s been hitting the UK music headlines more and more in the past few weeks, with the demand for an agreement between the Internet Service Providers and the BPI that addresses the issue – and time is of the essence. The government have already confirmed that they will take control of the situation if the problem cannot be resolved between the respective parties before April ‘09. That may sound like a way off, but the BPI have been speaking to the Internet Service Providers for well over 18 months now without much headway.

Feargal Sharkey, once of The Undertones and now CEO of British Music Rights (BMR), last month jumped on board calling for action from an audience of internet industry insiders (finding time to comment on the matter while undertaking his reviews of the UK copyright law – a discussion concerning the Gowers Review that is, itself, stirring up a controversial debate within the industry and the government about copyright extension.)

Getting back to the point at hand, it was initially reported in The Telegraph last week, though since denied by the BPI, that Virgin Media had agreed on a pilot scheme that would see two warning letters sent out to offending users before a third course of action would be taken to block the users access. Geoff Taylor, chief executive of the BPI, denied the papers claims saying that while they were encouraged by all these service providers’ admissions that the illegal downloading was a problem, there was a concern that it was yet to be backed up by action. Fear from the ISPs is thought to be at the centre of this as “even those ISPs that accept the need to act are concerned about taking action before their competitors do so.”

The BPI has outlined their thoughts on a fair and seemingly achievable system that seems not to hand over any rights to privacy. The suggestion works solely on getting the [already publicly viewable] IP address of offending users and forwarding them to the Internet Providers who will then send the owner of that IP address the letters of warning. The ISPs will also be encouraged to educate their users, alongside these communications, on how to reduce others using their connection for illegal file-sharing and how to better protect their own internet connection.

You can check out the BPI suggestions here. Are they fair, discriminative? Should ISPs be right to hold out, or are they protecting their own interests? Let us know what you think.

...amazingtunes.com