Government

New Media Classification System For UK
Gordon Brown has announced that a new labelling system for media content is in the works, designed to help parents protect their children from dodgy digital content.
The idea is that a system similar to cinema classifications would be introduced to classify content on websites, video games, TV shows and other media content.
Backed by industry regulator Ofcom, Brown intoned that the system would offer practical help to parents concerned about their little darlings being exposed to new media outlets seemingly stuffed to the brim with violent imagery, drugs and hot, hot sex.
Commenting on the veritable torrent of filth that virtually seeps out of every child’s PC as soon as they connect to the web, Brown said that it is an “issue we must address with practical proposals to address the challenges we face.”
“We want to promote a culture which favours responsibility and establishes boundaries: limits of what is acceptable and unacceptable.”
“We can’t and shouldn’t seek to turn the clock back on technology and change. Rather we need to harness new technology and use it to enable parents to exercise the control they want over the new influences on their children,” he added.
As part of the scheme, Ofcom will introduce common labelling standards covering cinema, TV, radio, computer games and the internet.
These will be backed up by an awareness campaign advising parents about content filtering software for PCs, and information about TV set top boxes which can limit what can and cannot be seen by little Timmy and Tabatha.
Brown added that they’ll also be looking at persuading technology manufacturers to provide better information on software to block content unsuitable for children, as well as investigating new methods to restrict access to saucy and violent content shared over the t’web.
Brown recognised that it’s a fat look of good trying to implement restrictions on just a national scale, pointing out that agreements need to be struck at the international level.
“We need to support all those broadcasters and providers doing a huge amount and of course we need to recognise there are global markets where we need international agreement,” he said, somewhat understating the importance of worldwide standards.
Of course, many companies and public institutions already use web filtering software but their methods can often resemble a 300 ton sledgehammer cracking a dwarf-sized peanut.
Scunthorpe. Arsenal. And Sex
The denizens of Scunthorpe and fans of Arsenal football club have already famously fallen foul of none-too-smart naughty word blockers, and many sites have complained about being blocked for the most spurious of reasons, with very little chance of retribution.
Some sites about UK counties have also found themselves banned from libraries and internet cafes because the word ‘sex’ has appeared in their domain name – even though the sites are about subjects as unerotic as Sussex, Essex and Wessex.
More about word filtering mistakes here: The Scunthorpe Problem
[From: Brown unveils classification system for new media]
7 March, 2007
Mobile Use In UK Cars: Penalty Points And Fines Await
As of today, drivers using their mobile phone while driving in the UK will be hit with increased fines.
The previous fixed-penalty fine of £30 is increased to £60 with the courts having a possible maximum fine of £1,000.
The real disincentive to drivers will, however, be the three penalty points that will be added to their driving license. If UK license holders have over 12 points on their license they are banned from driving for three years.
If those caught are driving anything bigger than a car, say a bus, coach or goods vehicle, the maximum fine is considerably higher, rising to £2,500.
Peter Rodger, the Institute of Advanced Motorists’ chief examiner, said: ‘Inevitably some drivers will think that they should buy a hands-free kit and the problem will go away.
“That would certainly suit the manufacturers. But drivers should be aware that they are potentially buying trouble – even when you are hands-free, research has shown that you are four times more likely to crash because your concentration is split.
“The best advice is to switch off before you drive off – and if you really can’t do that, be prepared to stop and find somewhere legal and convenient to return that missed call or check your messages.”
Some of the rules that do confuse are that the rules still apply, even when people are sitting in traffic jams.
27 February, 2007
Blair To Write To Each Road Pricing Petitioner
Over the last few weeks there’s been a lot of attention drawn to the huge number of votes cast by the British public in an online petition calling for the “Prime Minister to scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy.”
Over 1.5 million people have signed to show that they reject the idea from the UK government to force UK drivers to have to pay £200 for the privilege of having all of their car journeys monitored, recorded and charged accordingly.
On Saturday, the Guardian newspaper picked up on the idea that, as part of the registering views on the site, users had to enter their names, postal and email addresses, giving the UK government direct contact with each and every person who used the petition to voice their disapproval on the road usage charging scheme. They postulate that this gives them the opportunity of contacting the objectors directly to try and cajole them into changing their minds.
Quite if this is something that the petitioners realised when they placed their votes is unclear.
The site itself isn’t doesn’t really help either “our email will not be published, and is collected only to confirm your account and to keep you informed of response to this petition.”
Closer examination of the Privacy Policy makes it a little clearer- “unless you ask us not to, to write to you a maximum of two times about the issues raised in the petition.”
The straw poll that we’ve taken among some of those who had placed their votes, felt their email addresses were only required to validate the vote. They weren’t aware of the chance to opt-out of being contacted at a later date.
Blair writes about writing
Sunday’s Observer sees Tony Blair publishing a piece explaining what a great idea it is to have over 1.5 million people telling him he’s wrong, and how it has sparked debate … which luckily enough was just what he wanted … he tells us now. (Let’s hope he doesn’t mean like his nuclear power debate).
He goes on to say “What it has given us is the ability, which was simply not there before, to engage with those who have signed the petition,” he then confirms that “Over the next few days, I will be sending out a response to everyone who has signed the petition against road charging, explaining the problems the country faces and why I believe road charging is surely part of the answer here as it is in many other countries.”
So is the whole e-petition idea a ruse just to find out who opposes government policy – then use this information to write to them directly to ‘inform them of why they’re wrong not to be thinking the same way as the government.
If they find out this isn’t successful with all of the voters, they will be taken into detention centers and have it beaten into them (OK, I made this last bit up)
I suspect people will want to have their say, but when they receive government spin in return, will stop using their real email addresses and start taking advantage of temporary email addresses like Temporary inbox.
The Petition
Many people have also questioned whether they should pay yet more money to use their cars as there’s already an effective tax per mile of car usage – the heavily taxed petrol that the UK government already imposes.
19 February, 2007
Vodafone And Orange 3G RAN Share: Examined
As has been mentioned on Digital-Lifestyles, Orange and Vodafone have entered into an agreement to share their 3G Radio Access Network (or RAN). We thought you’d appreciate some more depth … and who better to give it than Steve Kennedy, our telco guru.
Currently Vodafone have a bigger network than Orange, so Orange would gain more than Vodafone from the deal, but in future it means that new cell sites will be used by both operators.
The agreement could have covered 2G (GSM) too, but as Vodafone use 900MHz systems and Orange use different systems operating in the 1800MHz band, it just not possible. That said, it’s likely future technology would allow both sets of frequencies to operate within the same radio equipment.
There will still be interesting problems to sort out for 3G sharing, as Vodafone exclusively use equipment from Ericsson, while Orange use equipment from Nortel, Siemens, Nokia and Alcatel.
Once the network is in place, each network will be responsible for enabling their own network services and ensuring quality of service, etc. As competition for customers increases this is a sensible way for operators to reduce cost, share the infrastructure and compete on service. It’s a shame the fixed networks don’t take this view, as has been pointed out before, the LLU operators could join forces and build a joint LLU network and then compete on service. This might give them a larger network, which would be of a size and scale to compete with BT’s upcoming 21CN.
Why the rush to build?
With a 3G license comes obligations and one of these was to reach 80% of the population by the 1st Dec, 2007. Though the GSM network coverage hit that a while ago, 3G expansion has been slower with few customers really wanting 3G services so the operators have built 3G networks in densely populated areas where they can make revenue from those customers. That means big cities have been covered, but elsewhere 3G coverage is patchy to say the least.
Hutchinson 3G (or 3 the new entrant into the mobile world) has been rapidly building its customer base and building a network to match. In June 2004, Ofcom tried rules that 3 had SMP (significant market power) in the 3G world, which meant it would be regulated by Ofcom much in the same way BT is for fixed networks. The other 3G operators happily supported Ofcom in this view. 3 didn’t want the increased regulatory burden and disagreed with Ofcom’s ruling, so appealed to the Competition Appeal Tribunal. They won their appeal in November 2005. This was the first time any network has successfully appealed against a SMP designation.
3 wasn’t happy about having SMP forced upon it and therefore made noises to Ofcom about coverage obligations, which the other networks weren’t meeting. They’ve got 10 months to hit that 80% figure.
Though city centres might have a demand for 3G (for data services, no one cares about 3G voice – a voice call sounds the same whether it’s 3G or GSM), as you leave dense urban areas the appeal of 3G is less. Well maybe not less, but there are less people to use it and less of a reason for the networks to install 3G infrastructure and sites.
The cost of a 3G cell is probably not much different in terms of equipment from that of a 2G cell, one major difference is the amount of bandwidth needed for the cell, as data volumes are significantly higher (maybe 40Kb/s using GPRS data compared to maybe 2Mb/s for 3G, multiply that by 10 users and it’s 400Kb/s compared to 200Mb/s).
UK backhaul (i.e. the pipes used to connect cells) are expensive. The more rural the cell site is. the less chance there is that anyone (except maybe BT) has got any kind of high bandwidth connectivity. Therefore, the costs of the backhaul may well exceed that of the cell site itself.
Sharing makes economic sense
Orange and Vodafone have to hit that 80% figure or Ofcom can impose fines which could be significant. Therefore the build out of a shared new network makes economic sense. It’s half of what they’d each have to pay.
In this climate of everyone’s customers wanting everything for nothing, being able to reduce your build costs may well be the straw that doesn’t break the camel’s back.
9 February, 2007
Orange And Vodafone Propose Sharing 3G Aerials In UK
There’s a lot of radical thinking going on in the mobile business these days and here’s the latest. Vodafone and Orange have signed a non-binding agreement to let each other to use the others 3G infrastructure.
It’s all about their RANs – Radio Access Networks, which connect customers mobiles to the operators networks.
Until now they’ve gone around installing their own, but are now realising that this is a mighty expensive business, seeing as the cost is several £100k per base station. In rural areas these may only service a handful of people, thus rending their investment uneconomic.
The core of the proposal is to
- Continue managing their own traffic independently
- Retain full responsibility for the quality of service they offer their respective customers
- Remain competitors in the UK mobile wholesale and retail markets
The summary – share infrastructure, but compete on service.
What’s forcing this?
When the mobile companies bid for the 3G licenses, not only did they pay over a huge amount of money, but they also took on obligations to provider 3G services to a certain percentage of the UK population.
As not many people have signed up for 3G, the mobile companies haven’t wanted to spend the money on servicing a population that isn’t giving them money with subscriptions and they’ve let their obligations slip. Until now Ofcom hasn’t been pursing them on this.
Three, the largest 3G provider in the UK, has recently been saddled with three little letters by Ofcom – SMP – Significant Market Power. They’re not too happy with the restrictions that this imposes on them, so have been pointing out to Ofcom that the other 3G license holders aren’t fulfilling their coverage obligations.
To ensure that they don’t get saddled with substantial fines by Ofcom, the other 3G holders will need to expand their infrastructure. By sharing costs on this, they save money.
More details of this will be provided by Steve Kennedy, an expert in this area, in an article ~~later today~~ tomorrow.
8 February, 2007
The Risks Of e-voting: ORG London Event
Clearly we love technology – it would be a bit of rum do calling ourselves Digital-Lifestyles if we didn’t.
Firm believers in technology being used to add something, not being used for the sake of it, we also think there are some areas that technology should stay out of.
One being the counting of votes for elections. Democracy is just too valuable to be fiddled with.
We’ve all heard about the introduction of electronic voting machines in America and the huge number of concerns that has thrown up. Hell, there was even a film made about it – Hacking Democracy.
As we in the tech world know, anything that is on a computer can be manipulated. Removing people, who bring the appropriate check and balances to the process, is a very bad idea.
What does it matter if it takes a little bit longer to count the votes? Who’s hurrying? Let’s not forget that the party elected in the UK is going to be in power for four years, so a couple of extra days to count the vote matters not.
There are just too many risks to let this go ahead.
Well, some bright spark appears to think that introducing computerised voting in the UK and further afield is a good idea.
Luckily the Open Rights Group (ORG) is holding some discussions on the 8th Feb to discuss this very subject.
If you’re near to London, we urge you to attend. This is important stuff.
25 January, 2007
Ofcom Proposed Spectrum Auction: Analysis
There’s a fair chunk of spectrum that’s sitting there not being used in the 2GHz band. The various bits are 2500-2690 MHz, 2010-2025 MHz and 2290-2300 MHz.
Ofcom has a duty to ensure spectrum isn’t wasted and as a consequence of the auction will end up driving revenue for the Government. Previously, and famously they did very well when they auctioned the 3G licenses, raising £21bn for the Treasury.
They recently auctioned some GSM spectrum and that only raised £3.8m, but it was much less than the 3G lot with many more restrictions.
Under its new face, and following EU directives, Ofcom likes to offer technology neutral licenses, which means the licensee can use the spectrum for whatever they want – as long as they meet the radio restrictions on that band (power, spectral masks, etc). They hope this will stimulate innovative services which is good for the economy.
There’s a lot of interest in the spectrum, as it could be used for lots of services including 3G and WiMAX, but that’s where the problems start.
Possible European Interference
There are various blocks of spectrum which are coordinated at a European level and each EU country uses the spectrum for the same things. That’s pretty much what happens for GSM and 3G, as well as some TV and radio bands.
It’s all organised by CEPT (European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications) and the Radio Spectrum Committee (RSC), CEPT is represented by 47 countries and the RSC by 25 EU states. They ensure that radio usage is coordinated. Unfortunately radio waves don’t abide by national borders, so it would be no good if one country was using spectrum for say TV and another for radio as they’d interfere with each other.
Though the UK is an island, interference issues are quite common, especially in the south east with France and the north east with the Dutch and even the Nordic countries. The west has to worry about Ireland (and of course Northern Ireland abides by UK policy).
These particular bands are already allocated for 3G, 10MHz in 2010 – 2020 MHz, is already designed for license-exempt self-provided, self-coordinated IMT-2000 use. In the UK none of the 3G networks have actually utilised it, though in other parts of Europe it has been used for this purpose.
2500 – 2690 MHz is currently mainly used for video broadcast systems, all licensees have been given notice to vacate by 31st December 2006. This is a significant amount of spectrum (190MHz) which is greater than is currently allocated to the whole of 3G use (140MHz). It was reserved for a “new” entrant if the current 5th 3G operator failed or for existing 3G expansion.
Ofcom’s suggestions summarised
Ofcom are currently holding UK consultations to see what stakeholders think should happen. They are proposing the following: –
2500-2690 MHz Packaged on the basis of blocks of 5 MHz as lots of paired spectrum (2×5 MHz, 120 MHz duplex spacing) and unpaired spectrum (5 MHz), with the eventual amount of lots in each category to be determined in the auction. The reference point is as per the CEPT band plan: 14 lots of paired channels (14x2x5 MHz with uplink in 2500-2570 MHz and downlink in 2620-2690 MHz) and 9 lots of unpaired channels (9×5 MHz in 2570-2615 MHz).
One guard channel will be necessary at adjacencies between paired and unpaired spectrum, at 2615-2620 MHz, and possibly another in the top part of the band.
There is a possibility to allow paired lots to be converted into the equivalent of two unpaired lots in the event that demand for unpaired lots exceeds that for paired lots at a given lot price.
Each bidder should receive contiguous lots in each category, except potentially one assignment of unpaired spectrum which could need to be split into two blocks of contiguous lots.
2010-2025 MHz Package for award as a single 15 MHz lot.
2290-2302 MHz Package for award as a single 10 MHz lot and retain 2300-2302 MHz for possible inclusion as part of a future award together with 2302-2310 MHz.
What might the response be?
The consultation will close in March 2007 and it’s likely the 3G operators will be extremely vocal in their claim to this spectrum, as they paid so much for their original licenses.
Once Ofcom digest the responses, they’ll then have to argue the case at the European level to ensure it can be licensed off in a technology neutral manner without upsetting our neighbours, however getting agreement from at least 47 countries tends to be a time consuming process.
Luckily CEPT are already discussing the issues and are expecting to make a statement in July next year. RSC will follow shortly after.
Although there’s no guarantee that discussions will go in Ofcom’s favour, they are hoping an award process can start in the Autumn of 2007, though it may well be delayed until 2008.
Potential Cash
With 16 national licenses available, there’s a fair amount of cash the government can expect to raise. Even if Ofcom set the minimum price at £50,000 then that’s £800,000 – they are likely to reach much higher values, although not the silly pricing that the original 3G licenses fetched.
Ofcom
CEPT (European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications)
Radio Spectrum Committee (RSC)
14 December, 2006
Micro FM Transmitters: UK Ofcom Says Yes
UK uber-regulator, Ofcom has finally got itself sorted out and is to allow the use of low-powered FM transmitters in the UK from 8 December.
These are commonly used by owners of portable music players to transmit their chosen musical ditties from the player to better amplification and speakers via a radio/tuner. You know those ‘young people’ often use them in their cars to wake up the neighbourhoods, with their ‘repetitive beats.’
It’s been a bit of a mystery as to why Ofcom hasn’t acted on this sooner given the number of people that use these devices and Ofcom’s desire to stay on top of technologies under their remit. Ofcom has allowed devices up to 59 nanoWatts, which doesn’t sound like a lot does it? In practical terms it means they’ll be able transmit over around 5 metres in clear space.
Devices that will benefit from this change will be iTrip by Griffin (probably the best known device) and devices like the RocketFM.
Ofcom’s research estimates that there are currently 875,000 of these in the UK – even with them being illegal (based on 10% of mp3 player owners having bought them).
We think this is a great thing, whose uses will only grow as people try to move music around their houses.
Expect these devices to be hitting the top of peoples xmas lists when the news hits the public. It’s going to be a good xmas for those involved in making or selling them.
Talk about the opposite ends of technology – Ofcom also tell us that these changes will free the-now 20,000 users of CB-radio from needing to apply for licenses to operate them. 10-4 big buddy.
Details at Ofcom.
Full Statement on the Wireless Telegraphy (Exemption) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 [pdf]
23 November, 2006
Britain: Third Worst Country For Privacy
Britain’s Information Commissioner has published a study concluding that, within 10 years, surveillance of people living in the UK will be all-pervasive.
Alongside the report is a league-table of privacy around the world. Shockingly, Britain currently is the third most surveilled country in the world, behind Russia and China.
CCTV coverage alone is at an all-time high, with an estimated 4.2m CCTV cameras, one for every 14 members of public in the UK.
It’s important to note that this study isn’t published by what some would view as a “pressure group” like Privacy International, but by a civil servant – The Information Commissioner.
This isn’t the first time that The Information Commissioner has raised concern over the way privacy is going in the UK. Two years ago he was on record as saying “we are sleepwalking into a surveillance society.”
His view now? “They (surveillance activities) may be necessary or desirable — for example to fight terrorism and serious crime, to improve entitlement and access to public and private services, and to improve health care. But unseen, uncontrolled or excessive surveillance can foster a climate of suspicion and undermine trust.”
He added: “As ever-more information is collected, shared and used, it intrudes into our private space and leads to decisions which directly influence people’s lives.
“Mistakes can also easily be made with serious consequences — false matches and other cases of mistaken identity, inaccurate facts or inferences, suspicions taken as reality, and breaches of security. I am keen to start a debate about where the lines should be drawn. What is acceptable and what is not?”
Comment
For a long time we at Digital-Lifestyles have been aware of the creeping nature of the loss of privacy in the UK, with our concern extending well before the so called “war on terror.” Since this “war,” the erosion increased exponentially in the name of “protecting” us.
It’s hugely refreshing that someone employed by the government – The information commissioner – has released this information. It must be a pretty serious state of affairs. What’s needed now is some real debate to take place (something increasingly rare in the UK in our view), with all points of view given equal prominence. Let’s get away from this ridiculous view that if you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to worry about.
Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)
Privacy International
2 November, 2006
No Protection For Online Gambling Bosses: Caborn
UK sports minister, Richard Caborn, has said that Britain would not protect online gaming executives from extradition requests if they took Internet bets from countries in which they were illegal. These won’t be welcome words to the people running the gambling companies, who have already taken a hit with the arrest of two execs in the US earlier this year.
Caborn was speaking at a summit, ironically held at the Ascot horse racing course in Berkshire, discussing and agreeing a draft framework of regulation to protect consumers and prevent underage gambling and gambling addiction.
“We now have in place a road map that will lead to better regulated remote gambling across the world,” he said.
It’s been reported that Caborn has plans to make Britain a “world leader” in Internet gambling, when internal Whitehall documents were leaked around the start of October.
(via Reuters)
1 November, 2006