Jonathan Bishop

The Institute of Life Sciences

Singleton Park
Swansea
West Glamorgan
SA2 8PP
Phone: 08454786390
Email:
jonathan.bishop@glamorgan.coop
Saturday 18 August 2012
Dear Geraint Davies,
Firstly, thank you for communicating on my behalf with regards to the Defamation Bill.
I am writing to you as the lead researcher at the Centre for Research into Online Communities and ELearning Systems at Swansea University, and director of Jonathan Bishop Limited, based in Swansea
also.
I am writing to you now about my views on the Online Safety Bill. I would first like to say that is is
badly written. It proposes to give OfCom new powers, without amending the Communications Act
2003 (Section 4); It also proposes new rules on pornography (section 1), but doesn't amend the
Obscene Publications Act. If it is not an amending Act it will make it difficult for those in the IT law like
myself to easily refer to the provisions.
With regards to Sections 2 and 3, I regard these to fall within Article 34 of the EU Treaty as a measure
having equivalent effect of inhibiting cross border trade. I believe they fall outside the 'rule of reason'
for 'consumer protection' or 'public health'.
Even if it did not apply to other EU countries it would put UK technology firms, like mine at a
disadvantage, and could put us in a position where we would have to breach Article 101 of the EU
Treaty by entering into exclusive distribution agreements in order to meet the obligations.
I would say that Section 2 on filtering is best dealt with through anti-virus software. I for instance use
Kaspersky and this blocks out all the undesirable content referred to in the Bill. It should be public
choice as to which service the public use and not force manufactures to tie software to their systems,
which was found illegal in Commission v Microsoft in the case of firms falling within Article 106 of the
EU Treaty.
Equally Section 3 would pose an unfair burden on technology firms like mine. I think this also falls
within Article 34 and outside the rule of reason and is disproportionate to what is trying to be
achieved. I run a website called the Trolling Academy, which provides a directory of all the online
safety websites that people can access:
http://www.trollingacademy.org/category/learning-resources/the-trolling-guide-and-unwritten-manual/
http://www.trollingacademy.org/how-we-can-help/
It should not be for legislation to create a nanny state that undermines the work of the independent
charities in this area, who can offer support beyond a 'Help' page provided by a technology firm. It
would also be more bureaucracy and red tape that the Government promised would not be levied on
SMEs like my technology firm.

Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Bishop LLM FBCS CITP