“How many times have I told you?”

In an attempt to cut illegal downloading by eighty per cent, an initiative involving music industry trade body, the BPI, the film industry and the government, has drawn up legislation that will potentially see the UK’s six largest internet service providers (ISPs) send out around 1,000 letters a week as a warning to those who use their bandwidth to illegally download, or worse, upload and share music and films.

The deal, ostensibly labelled as a Memorandum of Understanding, has been drawn up by the Department For Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) and signed by ISPs BT, Virgin, Orange, Tiscali, BSkyB and Carphone Warehouse.

Working alongside the ailing British music industry, which blames illegal downloading as the soul cause of its problems, the ISPs will soon be taking illegal downloading a lot more seriously. As a way of curbing the number of illegal downloaders in the UK, of which there is an estimated guilty 6.5 million, they will be sending threatening letters to the homes of anyone caught downloading or uploading files illegally.

If these warning letters aren’t a big enough deterrent, then naughty internet users could find certain sites blocked by their ISP, or even worse, have their connection speed slowed, making it impossible to download such content. There is also talk of cutting connections altogether if people refuse to stop downloading illegally – the ultimate punishment.

The “carry on doing this and we’ll cut off your broadband” warning letters are expected to have an immediate and long lasting effect, but critiques are sceptical. Consumer groups and music lovers, both legal and illegal, believe the onus is on the industry to modernise and keep pace with the evolving technology.

Even the artist’s themselves are accepting that illegal downloads are the way of the future. Welsh warbler Duffy is currently No 2 on illegal download site MP3 Fiesta’s chart, and she doesn’t seem that bothered. Speaking in ShortList magazine, she asked: “Downloading is amazing. It basically gives people access, where’s the harm in that?”

Continuing, she explains: “Illegal downloading can go two ways. Some people think it creates illegal access, but I think the big wheel is round, y’know?” Well no Duffy, I don’t really know. However, I do know that, according to BMR, the average teenagers iPod will blast out over 800 illegally copied songs, perhaps indicating that free downloading is a cheap alternative for music lovers who don’t want to pay £12 for an album from which they’ll only recognise one song…

The new deal between the ISPs and the government has caused a stir amongst internet users who want to keep their private lives private. The issue of monitoring internet usage is proving to be a controversial one, with many people complaining the UK is rapidly becoming a Big Brother nation, always under the watchful eye of the law.

To all those people who aren’t happy, if you’re not doing anything wrong then you’ll have nothing to worry about. What does it matter that MI6 are keeping tabs on the sites you visit and the links you click?

Personally, if the scheme does prove successful I don’t think music industry officials should expect the illegal downloaders to suddenly start forming a queue at HMV. I’m sure there are many other online time-consuming activities they can amuse themselves with. And while I don’t condone illegal file-sharing, and have never downloaded any music myself, I know plenty of people that have. Obviously not naming any names, I certainly wouldn’t want them to have their broadband cut off – who would I chat to on Facebook?

  The ‘Adrian Chiles Effect’

Those of you up to speed with the latest superfast broadband happenings will be aware of two things:

(1)   The BBC’s iplayer service is an incredible tool, but it spanks your download limit into oblivion, particularly if you’re on a starter or low-user package. Even those with an ‘unlimited download’ agreement aren’t safe. ISPs have reported a significant increase in traffic and capacity problems since the iplayer was launched.

(2)   Despite an unremitting campaign by Tiscali to have the BBC make a financial contribution to help upgrade the UK’s creaking and overloaded broadband networks, Ofcom has ruled the BBC should not be held financially liable for this.

Well, you can hear the sigh of relief at Broadcasting House from here (although I will confess to being sat in an office less than a mile from Broadcasting House. If anyone living in Arbroath heard the sigh then leave a comment underneath. It’ll give the piece more resonance).

Last time I checked, my TV license (yes, you guessed it, I’m going down that road) cost £139.50. Apparently, you can still get black and white TV licenses for only £47, but who (outside of Leicestershire) owns a black and white TV these days? So those of us with a colour set are paying 38p a day for the following:

•  My Family – As funny as having all your vital organs removed and sold on e-bay by rogue Lithuanian surgeons.

• Adrian Chiles – All of a sudden, drawing on your eyeball with a rusty needle doesn’t seem like such a bad idea.

• BBC News – So far behind they’re still reporting on the Cuban missile crisis.

• Jools Holland – Try playing another note for heaven’s sake.

• Neighbours – Nope, that’s gone to Five.

Turnover generated by the BBC through TV license fees rose to £3.1 billion last year; upgrading the broadband network would cost in the region of £830 million. Wouldn’t you prefer to see your license fee pumped into a project that will vastly improve every facet of your broadband connection, rather than criminally unfunny sitcoms? Although unintentional, there’s no denying the advent of iplayer has strained the broadband network, to the extent that non-iplayer users are experiencing knock-on effects such as speed caps and overstretched customer service centres.

Potential solutions include a content-led exclusivity tariff, where ISPs do deals with content providers to ensure their products run more smoothly across that particular ISP’s network. Hence you could see Orange sign a deal with the BBC, and as a result iplayer would run glitch free using minimal bandwidth on Orange only, with the other ISPs having to settle for standard, bulky iplayer traffic.

In terms of trying to persuade the BBC to chip in, was the wrong ISP doing the chasing? Perusing the list of customer reviews on Broadband Choices, it becomes apparent Tiscali haven’t quite had their house in order since traffic shaping problems and LLU mishaps blighted their service earlier this year. Perhaps Virgin Media, with their Samuel L. Jackson fronted ghetto mentality, would have been better placed to storm Broadcasting House and ‘wup some corporation ass’ (or some such other generic action movie colloquialism)?

So, who’s accountable for upgrading the broadband network to the point that it can cope with iplayer-style applications?

Is it the responsibility of the ISP to get busy, the content provider to box clever, or the consumer to download sensibly?

Ladies and Gentlemen, it’s over to you.