UK.gov makes total pig's ear of attempt to legalise home CD ripping

Failure to cough up gets new law torn apart in court

Opting in, opting out

The Quilty-era IPO was behind the orphan works land grab that was thrown out of the Digital Economy Act in 2010. The IPO tried again, creating the "Instagram Act" that collectivised photos and images.

In practice under the Instagram Act, an image you created and posted to Facebook or Flickr wouldn't really belong to anyone, but could be used by anyone without permission or paying you for it. Amongst the barmier ideas floated were forcing everyone to opt-in to copyright. Both are illegal under the Berne Convention: unlike trademarks, you don't need to register a copyright work to get protection. Your rights are automatic.

Both ideas take the view that property isn't property, and the individual who created it is a kind of nuisance. A benevolent cybernetic utopia would descend upon us, once the "friction" of ownership was abolished.

These events led to a Parliamentary enquiry by MPs, which recommended the rogue IPO be brought under adult supervision.

As we see today, the IPO's actions from that time are still costing the taxpayer money - and British citizens still don't have a copying exception.

The UK government has already ruled out introducing a levy, so a fund of some kind will probably accompany the exception's re-introduction. The Secretary of State told Mr Justice Green that UK.gov has now retreated for a period of "reflection". ®