BPI eye P2P OK

Britain could be about to follow South Korea and offer a proper, licensed peer-to-peer network, as a result of government banging together heads of record companies and ISPs:

The co-operation follows the intervention of "Brown's Fist", the former advisor and Parliamentary Under-Secretary at BERR (the Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform) Baroness Shriti Vadera. Vadera is understood to have threatened both the ISP and music businesses with reform and policy intervention, threats which encouraged both parties to open negotiations.

Interesting - if the Andrew Orlowski's report is correct, then it seems the reason why the BPI have been reluctant to push for legislation bringing in three strikes is fear of what the balance would be in return, then.

There are wrinkles still to be sorted out - not least the question of how much this is going to cost. Would we be expected to pay, say, eMusic subscription rates for a service where the consumer is providing the infrastructure for distribution - in other words, why should a subscriber pay as much for delivery when they drive to the depot to collect the product, and then drop off packages for other people?

More to the point, seriously, could the music industry cope with not being able to paint p2p as an evil, thief-riddled technology and play its part in promoting the idea that all that stuff they warned you about - viruses, secret porn, people stealing your files, cooties - isn't a problem all of a sudden?

[Thanks to Duncan G]