Where the campaign against Peter Mandelson has got it wrong

I support the campaign by the Open Rights Group and others against Peter Mandelson’s proposed crackdown on illegal file-sharing.

But in agreeing to call the proposals “three strikes and you’re out”, I think the campaign has ceded an important advantage to Peter Mandelson & co. That is because, taken on its own, that phrase actually sounds pretty reasonable.

Imagine someone hearing of the proposals in a mainstream media story where the limitations of time and space often mean little is said about the detailed pros and cons of a policy. The very name itself – “three strikes and you are out” – makes it sound reasonable: You have to do something wrong three times before you get punished? What could be wrong with that – except perhaps why be so generous as to wait until the third time?

For policy and political wonks “three strikes and you are out” may bring up negative thoughts of draconian sentencing laws tried out in the US – third offence equals heavy jail sentence – which have resulted in lengthy jail sentences for minor (third) crimes. But for most people, using this description makes the policy sound decent.

That is particularly ironic given the practical details with Mandelson’s plan means that in practice it would be anything but three strikes and you’re out.

People knowingly share internet connections (e.g. within a household). People unknowingly share their internet connection with others (e.g. when a computer is infected with malware). ISPs are not exactly strangers to making a mess of customer records, such as about who has got which internet connection. And so on – including, most perniciously, an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.

In other words, far from “three strikes and you’re out”, it’s far more a case of legal roulette. Just because you’re innocent won’t stop you from being treated as guilty and having to acquit yourself from someone else’s actions.

What to call it instead? Ah, um… I’ll admit to having not come up with a good alternative so far. But I’m sure the campaign will do better if someone does.

2 responses to “Where the campaign against Peter Mandelson has got it wrong”

  1. Open rights Group are leading the campaign against Mandelson’s three strikes
    proposals. We’re having a Q&A session for bloggers to let you in on our work and get your views.

    When? 1830, 24 November 2009 (for an hour or so)
    Where? (How to use IRC:
    RSVP to

    We want to make blogger Q&As a regular feature in future so please do get involved with this and feel free to pass on the invite.

    For more info, check out

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments and data you submit with them will be handled in line with the privacy and moderation policies.