The Act imposes certain obligations on internet service providers to deal with persistent copyright infringement.
The obligations, which will be set out in detail in a code drafted by regulator Ofcom, include notifying subscribers about alleged infringements and keeping records for each subscriber. The Act also requires ISPs to send anonymised lists of infringements by a subscriber to copyright owners on request and provides for the future introduction of technical measures to block internet access.
It is estimated that the requirements could cost ISPs some £30 million to £50 million a year.
The telecoms companies sought a judicial review of the Act on various grounds including that the European Commission had not been properly informed about it and that it conflicted with European law.
But in April last year Mr Justice Kenneth Parker rejected their application, with one small exception regarding the costs arrangements.
The companies appealed the decision, and in October last year Lord Justice Lewison granted an appeal on four specific points: the need to notify the European Commission; infringement of Articles 12 and 3 of the E-Commerce Directive; infringement of Article 8(2)(e) of the Data Protection Directive; and infringement of the Authorisation Directive.
Yesterday, barrister Antony White QC set out the telecoms companies’ arguments. Today, James Eadie QC and Pushpinder Saini QC will present the opposing case.
The appeal is being heard by three judges, Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Richards and Lord Justice Patten. A decision can be expected within the next few months.
