Mounting opposition to the formation of a Digital Rights Agency could mean plans for such an organisation may eventually be scrapped.

The idea for a new regulator to oversee online copyright for music and film was first put forward in Lord Stephen Carter’s Digital Britain interim report in March. Since then outright criticism of the idea has been voiced.

Consumer rights watchdog Consumer Focus accused the Government of trying to steamroller through the proposals by only giving affected parties 10 days in which to respond.

Ed Mayo, chief executive of Consumer Focus, said: "This must be the shortest 'non-consultation' in history. This issue needs to be debated thoroughly, not decided on the basis of some quick 'conversation' held by men in suits.

"The thinking is fundamentally flawed and would result in thousands of consumers being needlessly criminalised."

The two bodies that would have had to fund the agency were also deeply unimpressed.

The UK internet service provider industry body, the Internet Providers’ Association (ISPA), warned an agency would merely increase the financial and regulatory burden on ISPs. This would impact directly on the cost of broadband services to consumers, in effect acting as a blanket ‘internet tax’.

The UK’s music industry body, the BPI, said the creation of a separate body was unnecessary, and continued its call for a legislative approach. It said the voluntary approach had failed so legal measures should be put in place to force internet service providers to restrict or cut off the internet connections of people who persistently downloaded copyright material illegally.

Now even Lord Carter could be backtracking on the idea. In an interview for the Daily Telegraph he hinted that the proposal may now be dropped, considering the opposition to it.

However, the BPI's proposals, often dubbed the three strikes rule, may itself not be possible. Yesterday in Strasbourg, the ITRE committee on industry, research and energy of the European Parliament adopted an amendment of the EU Telecoms package.

Amendment 138 (now renumbered amendment 46) states that restrictions to the fundamental rights and freedoms of internet users can only be put in place after a decision by judicial authorities, save when public security is threatened, in which case the ruling may be subsequent.