Thank you very much for your reply.
First cyber crime incidents in Bangladesh received due attention of the police authority nearly 9 years back. On 23 August 2004 an email was sent to The Daily Prothom Alo threatening to kill Sheikh Hasina, the then Leader of the Opposition in the parliament. Two days latter on 25 August/2004 another email was sent to the Bangladesh Police Headquarters threatening Khaleda Zia, the then Prime Minister, her elder son and some members of the parliament.
Cyber-crime is still a low priority to Bangladeshâ€™s concerned authority. Very few computers related offences are reported to the police. To investigate the most complicated hi-tech computer related crimes, our whole security systems need to be furnished with modern techniques. Only positive news in this regard in Bangladesh is the declaration to set up tribunal.
UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has told an international conference in Budapest that cybercrime was "one of the greatest global and strategic challenges of our time". Mr Hague highlighted the UK's resolve to tackle the problem - it is spending Â£2m setting up a cybercrime centre. And he warned that attempts by governments to block controversial material were doomed to failure.
Recent UKâ€™s proposed legislation
The Digital Economy Act 2010 received Royal Assent at the very end of the last Parliament. Sections 3 to 18 of the Act cover online infringement of copyright. Several provisions have proved controversial and have not yet been implemented. The Government is proceeding with implementation of an â€œinitial obligations codeâ€ (allowed for under section 11 of the Act). Under the proposed system, an internet service provider would send a warning letter to a customer detected downloading copyright material for free from the internet. If the infringing activity continued, two follow-up letters would be sent. Once the third letter was dispatched, the customerâ€™s download history could be released to the owners of the copyrighted material, enabling legal action to be initiated against the infringer. However, the copyright owner would first have to gain a court order to determine the identity of the file sharer, as the download history provided would be anonymised. Customers thus accused would be able to file an appeal for Â£20, which would be refunded if the appeal were successful. The Act also envisaged further measures which might be taken against infringers such as blocking their internet access or temporarily suspending their accounts. Such measures could only be considered after the Code has been in force for at least 12 months, and would require further legislation and approval by Parliament.