Analysis: Will Burnham pledge help TV?

The government today said halting piracy would help the "creative industries" - and that could mean better video on demand, or ad supported free music, for all of us. But internet service providers, who have been ordered to sort it out or face new laws, disagree.

“Let me make it absolutely clear: this is a change of tone from the Government,” said culture secretary Andy Burnham, announcing his "action plan" to boost Britain's "creative enterprises". The most lucrative, of course, being the multi-billion-pound music and TV industries.

The British Phonographic Institute, which has been leading calls for action against service providers to stop file sharing, was clearly delighted with the proposals.

"The clear timetable of legislation means that it is now or never for ISPs to negotiate effective and viable agreements with us," said chief executive Geoff Taylor.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin, minister for intellectual property, said the threat of a new law - as early as April next year if the providers do not shift before - was vital to protect "the long-term economic viability of our creative enterprises" in the changing media landscape.

In backing the production industry, the government is accepting the argument that illegal downloads are hindering the development of legal alternatives. Legislation, it is implied, would speed up an otherwise under-performing video on demand sector.

It is with this point that the service providers disagree, with more than a little bitterness. More than 17m people in the UK have watched old shows on the BBC's iPlayer, thousands have access to Sky Anytime on PC and millions more use the dozens of other services providing video and music legally on the internet.

All this, of course, comes down pipes run by ISPs and has an impact, and a cost, on them. Some providers believe that without significant investment, video on demand will soon cause serious problems for their networks.

"We know that legal services are thriving," said an official at the Internet Service Providers Association. "There has been massive growth in revenue from digital downloads and any suggestion that the internet is not contributing to rights holders is ridiculous."

The spokesman said producers and broadcasters' demands for providers to tighten up were "a strange criticism when the industry profits from the bandwidth they use without any suggestion they should pay for it".

Cost also highlights another sore point in the dispute. The ISPA is negotiating with the Motion Picture Association of America in an attempt to develop a voluntary solution, something which everyone advocates publicly.

But a major sticking point appears to be payment. Tiscali reportedly cancelled a system of co-operation, where it would throw off repeat file-sharing offenders, because the rights owners were not prepared to pay its costs.

The ISPA added: "It seems right that rights holders should pay for protection of their intellectual property rights," comparing the situation to publishing, where the creator would generally track down and take action against the culprits.

However, the association also agrees that providing decent legal alternatives should help reduce illegal activity. The enduring popularity of illegal downloads - and grey-area services such as TV Links and TVCatchup, until they were closed - seems to prove there is still a problem.

In the current state of convergence, with broadcasters now serving as some of the UK's biggest ISPs, it is almost surprising the two sides have come to such a dispute.

One of the key names bridging the divide is Sky. The company is desperately building its broadband service while also providing pay TV, video on demand and having close links to content giants. It is keen to stress duties to its users but is already operating a voluntary system along the lines of that the ISPA is looking at.

"The rights of customers and copyright holders are both important, so we aim to take a collaborative approach through constructive dialogue with rights owners," said a spokesman for Sky.

"By acting responsibly in addressing alleged infringements and developing easy ways for customers to access content, we believe we can move towards a sustainable model which safeguards the rights of customers and rights holders."

It is unclear whether Sky and Virgin, and to some extent Tiscali - also now operating its own paid-for IPTV service - are winners or losers from Burnham's toughened up tone.