The ruling is mostly full of shit:
Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists
I'd like to see evidence to back this up, innocent until proven guilty and all.
FTA: "Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists," the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said.
That's the BPI's comment on the ruling, not the ruling itself.
This [1] is the original opinion in the case, to which this ruling refers, and which will take some time to read. It shouldn't be necessary to remind folks that the UK doesn't have a constitutional guarantee of free speech like the US constitution odes, and commercial speech is thus subject to regulation. Kudos to ZDnet [2][3] for including a link to the court's opinion in their story; any media site that reports on a court case without linking to or identifying it by name is likely not worth your time.
FTA: "Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists," the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said.
That's the BPI's comment on the ruling, not the ruling itself.
This [1] is the original opinion in the case, to which this ruling refers, and which will take some time to read. It shouldn't be necessary to remind folks that the UK doesn't have a constitutional guarantee of free speech like the US constitution odes, and commercial speech is thus subject to regulation. Kudos to ZDnet [2][3] for including a link to the court's opinion in their story; any media site that reports on a court case without linking to or identifying it by name is likely not worth your time.
1. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/268.html
2. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/tech-tech-boom-10017860/uk-isps...
3. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/intellectual-property/2012/02/21...