|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Recently, the New Zealand government passed perhaps the harshest anti-copyright law in the world. The law was passed under the Copyright Amendment Act and forces ISPs to turn off the internet to anyone who is suspected of breaking copyright law. That means that your internet could get cut without warning and without prosecution; unlike every other law, it assume guilt before trial. What's worse is that the definition of ISP includes any business providing internet - this includes schools, coffee shops and whatnot.
This law has only recently flared up in the media and has met with public outcry. One avenue of protest worth singling out is the "blackout" campaign on facebook; where those opposed to the law are replacing their profile pictures with a plain black image. This is certainly a dark day for the internet in New Zealand (and now I guess Australia finally can start giving NZ shit about our internet).
+ Show Spoiler [Articles] +Organized crime is everywhere. There's the Sicilian Cosa Nostra, the American Mafia and the Russian Mafia. There's also the Japanese Yakuza and, until they got so wealthy from their realty holdings and legitimate businesses they couldn't afford to be outside of the law, the Irish Sinn Fein.
The cynical among us might also include the barons of Wall Street and the cartels that control oil (OPEC) and diamonds (DeBeers), along with the U.S. health insurance industry (how they avoid being taken to court for their antitrust activities is a source of endless surprise to me).
There's another type of group that is indeed organized and whose actions border on criminal and are dangerous to Internet users, and that is the various groups around the globe that claim to represent the recording industry.
These groups represent huge private corporations such as record labels and distributors and are remarkably powerful. One such outfit, the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ), has just achieved something so outrageous, so stupendously immoral that it bears careful consideration.
Here's the story: A law was recently passed in New Zealand that has created what many consider to be the world's harshest copyright enforcement law. This insanity, found in Sections 92A and C of New Zealand's Copyright Amendment Act 2008 establishes – and I am not making this up – a guilt upon accusation principle!
Yep, you read that right. This means that anyone accused of "copyright infringement" will get his Internet connection cut off; and treated as guilty until proven innocent.
And if that weren't enough, this crazy legislation defines anyone providing Internet access as an ISP and makes them responsible for monitoring and cutting off Internet access for anyone who uses their services and is accused of copyright violations. Thus libraries, schools, coffee shops, cafes – anyone offering any kind of Internet access – will be considered ISPs and become responsible and potentially liable.
How could this ridiculous idea have become law in one of the nicest, most civilized countries I've ever visited (I've been to New Zealand twice and Kiwis, as they are called, are extremely friendly, relaxed, generous and hospitable, probably because they live in some of the most beautiful countryside on Earth).
The answer is that it is the result of immense pressure from the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand. In much the same way that the Recording Industry Association of America has used its massive legal resources to bully, harass and prosecute individuals alleged to have infringed copyright, so RIANZ lobbied and somehow managed to persuade New Zealand's parliament that the law was just, reasonable and the right thing to do.
Consider that similar proposals have not only been rejected by the European Union, but have actually resulted in the European Parliament voting in favor of an amendment against such legislation.
The EU amendment prohibits member states from implementing laws that would allow the disconnection of people accused of file-sharing based on the often dubious "evidence" (see "Tracking the Trackers") of anti-piracy groups.
This amendment -- which states that any such legislation "disconnecting alleged file-sharers based on evidence from anti-piracy lobby groups restricts the rights and freedoms of Internet users" -- put in a timely appearance given the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has been lobbying hard for such laws and the French government was on the verge of actually implementing a bill similar to New Zealand's.
It seems that all of these industry meta-groups, the RIANZ, the BPI, and our own Recording Industry Association of America, just can't get their heads around the fact that they have a problem that can't be fixed the way they want it to be fixed. Instead they resort to politics and bullying to get what they want and it seems that many governments are willing to go along. Perhaps this isn't so surprising because all bureaucrats seem to repeat the same dumb mistakes. - source: http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2009/022309-backspin.html?page=1[quote]Thursday at noon, some 120 protesters descended upon the parliament in the capital, Wellington, and handed over an e-petition against the amendments with over 12,000 signatories, and a traditional one with 148 names, to the United Future party leader Peter Dunne. Section 92A which will force ISPs to disconnect customers who have allegedly infringed copyright. The demonstrators were waving black placards reading "ISPs are not a court" and "Fair go, not Fear go". Organizers Bronwyn and Matthew Holloway of the Creative Freedom Foundation said they weren't disappointed with the response. As well as the petition to Dunne, the Holloways handed a CD of their The Copywrong Song to all 122 Members of Parliament. Half of the signatories to the online petition were artists, Matthew Holloway said. Also, he claimed that the CFF now had over 6,000 members, making it larger than the Australasian Performing Rights Association (APRA) in NZ. Holloway said he was hopeful that S92A would be repealed. CFF will continue to campaign for this, with an internet blackout (design protest) coming up for many popular websites in New Zealand next Monday. Hoping that the issue will move into the general interest area, and not be seen as a strictly technical or legal one, Holloway was keen to point out that it affects anyone connected to the internet. Mauricio Freitas, proprietor of large NZ tech site Geekzone, also took part in the demonstration. He said: "I'm against copyright infringement and believe we need a law to curb it." However, Freitas said the new law didn't provide those accused with a "due course of action" in case the allegations are incorrect. Furthermore, Freitas expressed concern about the implementation of the law from a content provider's perspective. "It's really unclear how it'll affect us and if it does, how to enforce it," he said. In a further development, the opposition communications and information technology spokesperson, Clare Curran, sought leave in parliament to introduce a Bill to amend the Copyright Act to ensure that a workable code of practice was in place before the contentious Section 92A comes into force. The code would have to be approved by the relevant minister as well. Presently, Section 92A looks set to come into effect on 28 February, but the ISP and telco industry organisation Telecommunications Carriers Forum (TCF) doesn't yet have a code of practice ready for its members, as rights holders have rejected parts of the draft version, relating to the need for evidence that will hold up in court and cost recovery for providers. The governing National Party refused leave for Curran's Bill however, and she will now submit her Bill as a Private Member's submission. Curran criticized National for "sitting on its hands on the copyright issue," even though it was her party, Labor, that introduced the controversial amendments to the Bill.[/qoute] - source: [url=http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-270800.html]http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-270800.html[/url] [quote]British humourist, broadcaster, author and technofreak Stephen Fry has added his support to online campaigns against New Zealand’s new copyright legislation, which would require ISPs to disconnect customers accused of downloading copyright material. The controversial Section 92A of the Copyright Act comes into force on February 28th. Copyright holders and the telco industry are continuing talks on a code of practice for ISPs to deal with the legislation. A draft code has been released for public discussions, with submissions due to close on March 6th. An organisation called the Creative Freedom Foundation has been campaigning against the law, and now a content creator, Juha Saarinen, has urged Web site owners, bloggers and users of social networks (Twitter, MySpace, Facebook, etc.) to black out a page or some content this week in protest at the legislation. Saarinen says the law is “there for the large entertainment organisations to terrorise Internet users”. In response to a request from Saarinen, Fry has blacked out his image on his Twitter page. [/quote] - source: [url=http://www.netguide.co.nz/20090216894/fry-backs-campaign-against-92a.php]http://www.netguide.co.nz/20090216894/fry-backs-campaign-against-92a.php[/url]
|
51451 Posts
looks like aus will be welcoming some new immigrants!
|
if I was in new zeland I would be causing some hell...all the while screaming "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!"
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
Aww nuu!!!  P
That is the shittest luck ever Plexa, well, the internet is just a plane trip away 
|
yeah, i migrated from nz to aus actually (from china to nz, then to aus). its a good place over here, although i definitely miss the peace and quiet of nz (ah, the serenity...).
bad luck about that, but i guess only time will tell exactly how strictly they will enforce it and the actual impact on everyone.
|
ouch, holy shit, poor new zealander's 
|
this reminds me of a law in Sweden that got pushed through last year that basically allows the government to spy on and tap phones/computers of citizens they suspect of terrorist and/or organized crime activities. The so called "FRA law" (scandinavian ppl should know about it).
I don't know what's worse. This or that.
Sucks though Plexa :S
Should do what the Swedish people did - demonstrate your ass off till they at least agree on changing key factors of the law.
|
How can the government check that the ISPs are disconnecting people accused of infringement? And how can anyone other than ISPs find out about infringement in the first place? I think the law has plenty of holes in it and will fail, unless ISPs decide to kill off there own customers. Although I have heard of cases of cease and desist prior to this about illegal downloads.
Either way this is just another notch against our pathetic internet service.
|
cant happen here in america can it?
|
As if the internet in New Zealand wasn't bad and expensive enough. I'm really sorry that you guys got the shaft so hard.
|
That sucks New Zealanders. Internet neutrality will eventually become a big issue but currently people just aren't educated enough about the intertubes.
|
Let me just remind all the aussies out there of the iinet lawsuit.
iinet, the third and perhaps the most successful ISP in Australia outside of Telstra and optus (The two big telecom corps that everyone had to put up with for some many years) is being sued by 7 media companies (Warner, sony blah blah blah) for guess what? doing nothing to stop bittorrenting.
They are really out to make iinet an example. If iinet loses the case, i don't see why government won't introduce laws similiar to the OP.
If iinet loses, i certainly will join any demonstrations, TIME TO THROW A FEW CHAIRS!
|
as an australian, i can sympathise with retarded internet issues
prices are way too high for such horrible caps here, i dont even give a shit about the speed, im just sick of the bullshit caps and the horrible pricing.
besides, bittorrenting isnt even illegal. i too will join in protests and demonstrations
|
jesus fu*kin christ..
and yet i had feared the day will come at some stage, though not in my life time -_-;;;
and i am hoping by 'suspected of breaking copyright law', they are only tracking torrents because eitherwise i will no longer be able to watch sc on youtube..
but seriously.. SERIOUSLY THIS CALLS FOR SOME RIOTING!~!!
schrel i want 6fac dropship nuclear action on the govt asap~~
|
I bet well over half of NZ people do some sort of 'copyright infringement' on the internet. They wouldn't really cut EVERYONE'S internet off... would they? D:
|
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ)
|
On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ)
Geeks on the internet make up a small proportion of a country's population and an even smaller proportion of "willing to protest" citizens. Everyone should be concerned with these kind of laws, but they're just ignorant.
|
51451 Posts
On February 22 2009 18:41 haduken wrote:
Let me just remind all the aussies out there of the iinet lawsuit.
iinet, the third and perhaps the most successful ISP in Australia outside of Telstra and optus (The two big telecom corps that everyone had to put up with for some many years) is being sued by 7 media companies (Warner, sony blah blah blah) for guess what? doing nothing to stop bittorrenting.
They are really out to make iinet an example. If iinet loses the case, i don't see why government won't introduce laws similiar to the OP.
If iinet loses, i certainly will join any demonstrations, TIME TO THROW A FEW CHAIRS!
if this happens, i hope it wont be before 2011.
then i can move out after i do my hsc to a more internet friendly country, like japan or sweden =]
|
I wonder if this is going to be a scare tactic similar to how the RIAA went on a rampage and pulled Napster users into high profile court cases and squeezed thousands of dollars out of offending parties ... then eased off the whip when they saw a lot of people got spooked.
Likewise, maybe the NZ govt. hope to spook internet users from sharing copyright material by clamping down on certain users, and stop enforcing once they see "improvement". at least logistically and practically, to carry out this law continuously without abuse is nearly impossible.
But then again, you're in the land down under, and from what i hear, you guys can be pretty hardcore...or at least your neighbors can be.
|
On February 22 2009 19:37 GTR-2-Go wrote:
if this happens, i hope it wont be before 2011.
then i can move out after i do my hsc to a more internet friendly country, like japan or sweden =]
I beleive I finish school the same year as you and to be honest, I'm thinking the same thing. =)
Edit: Makiva, that is an extremely off-topic video. Really unnecessary -.-
|
On February 22 2009 19:34 Nytefish wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) Geeks on the internet make up a small proportion of a country's population and an even smaller proportion of "willing to protest" citizens. Everyone should be concerned with these kind of laws, but they're just ignorant.
Yeah, exactly. This is sad, because it's hard to prevent such things when the majority doesn't know or care about it (at first).
However, once this law is in effect and many are (falsely) accused and lose their internet access, there will be massive outcries, I'd bet.
Reading stuff like this makes me happy to live here, where we're still fairly reasonable about all copyright-related things. 
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) This took us/me completely by surprise. It hasn't been until recently that this bill has hit the internet/media and the stupidity of it exposed. We were taken by surprise t.t I hope other nations won't fall into the same trap. Although, there were protests before it was signed but i mean, once a govt's in power theres nothing you can do about it.
|
On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ)
What do you want me to do about it? :|
I only learned of this last week. I'm waiting to see what happens when businesses/universities get their internet shut down.
|
An awesome way to fight this would be mass civil disobedience, turning yourself in for torrenting and asking the ISPs to shut down your internet, or producing proof that business/university networks have been used in illegal activities and asking for their immediate shutdown.
I mean they cannot really be selictive enforcing the law can they?
|
dam that sucks for all the people who live in NZ
|
Tough luck; seems like the days of leeching for you guys are pretty much over.
I find it hard to understand though, how someone's internet access can be denied simply on the basis of suspect and without real evidence ( if I understood Plexa's post correctly). Basicly a carte blanche for the ISPs?
This law might actually scare a lot of people off, which could have more effect on piracy than the actual law itself. However that's just a wild guess.
|
Oh crap, whats the point in having unlimited bandwith if i can't use it to download?
|
Wow that is terrible. Sorry all you NZ guys.
|
On February 22 2009 19:37 GTR-2-Go wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 18:41 haduken wrote:
Let me just remind all the aussies out there of the iinet lawsuit.
iinet, the third and perhaps the most successful ISP in Australia outside of Telstra and optus (The two big telecom corps that everyone had to put up with for some many years) is being sued by 7 media companies (Warner, sony blah blah blah) for guess what? doing nothing to stop bittorrenting.
They are really out to make iinet an example. If iinet loses the case, i don't see why government won't introduce laws similiar to the OP.
If iinet loses, i certainly will join any demonstrations, TIME TO THROW A FEW CHAIRS! if this happens, i hope it wont be before 2011. then i can move out after i do my hsc to a more internet friendly country, like japan or sweden =]
there's an ongoing trial against ThePiratebay.org in Sweden. Depending on the outcome, we could see some serious lawchanges in Sweden in the near future.
The trial still looks uncertain, although slightly in the defenders' favor.
|
If this becomes real, one option is to stop BTing and start newsgrouping.
It is faster and have decent content. I think the idea is that it is not easy for authorities to track people this way.
what the government is effectively doing is limiting people and controlling how contents are distrabuted in their respective countries.
I am willing to pay for legal downloads. What i am not ok with is being limited to what i can see or listen to on the internet. The only way for me to get contents is by downloading, sometimes that has to resort to BT or newsgroup because the local provider can not fulfill that.
People should be educated but with the amount of retards that i see every day at work, i feel that the battle has already being lost.
|
People who try to keep themselves from being frauded on a regular basis by kids who want more stuff than they can earn fairly, spending money on drugs or t shirts or ice cream instead of on the music they regularly listen to; are now in the same group as the mafia? What a joke.
Filesharing where people obtain a song without ever paying for it, that if the technology did not exist they would pay for is ridiculous. There are two sides to the pendulum. Right now we are on the side of completely rampant internet piracy; and in the 70's and 80's it was on the side of completely unfair pricing from record companies and ludicrous opulence for the industry. We need to get to a centre of normality. While I don't necessarily agree that trying to stop and silence a huge degree of internet filesharing is the best way forward, it certainly is the quickest and least radical; and let's face it, aside from porn, copyright infringement probably accounts for most peoples' download operations.
I very much doubt we would all know so much about torrents and internet filesharing if there weren't free stuff to get out of it.
|
that's really neat plexa. thanks for sharing with us.
|
On February 22 2009 23:14 simfarm wrote:
that's really neat plexa. thanks for sharing with us.
Not sure if 'neat' is the right term for this.
That really sucks for you New Zealanders. What is it with internet regulation in your part of the world?
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Up until recently NZ has been one of the freest countries in the world - but this looks to change that =/
|
I like how people says "why do citizens let this happen?" as if anyone in any country anywhere has any real power to change the course of their government.
|
On February 23 2009 00:33 Plexa wrote:
Up until recently NZ has been one of the freest countries in the world - but this looks to change that =/
anarchy now.
|
I will however also add that downloading copywritten things is stealing, period. You are getting value for nothing. I vehemently disagree that the ISP/government/anyone other than the person who commits the act should be held responsible for this, but the individual who does it should be punished.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On February 23 2009 00:56 Ingenol wrote:
I will however also add that downloading copywritten things is stealing, period. You are getting value for nothing. I vehemently disagree that the ISP/government/anyone other than the person who commits the act should be held responsible for this, but the individual who does it should be punished. Yes, fair enough. But this law is ridiculous - if you are even suspected of committing such acts your internet access is removed. That is independent whether the person is guilty or not - which is just wrong.
|
That's horrible
Did the government already begin to execute this law??
|
Holy shit, that is messed up. Can't believe they think they're actually in the right about this.
|
Might happen here too quite soon...
Stupid old people and medias don't even understand what is going on ...
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
Wow, NZers are fucked. Aussies are going to get a lot of people :D
|
i think there needs to be some showmatches between aussy dingos and us proud kiwis :D
|
On February 22 2009 20:54 H wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) What do you want me to do about it? :| I only learned of this last week. I'm waiting to see what happens when businesses/universities get their internet shut down.
Yea, I don't know I'm not really blaming anyone specifically. I'm talking about in general, such as the patriot act, etc. In general, the world seems quite content with sacrificing their freedoms for security.
|
It starts with one country, and then now you're going to see it everywhere in the world. I think the netizens across the world should take a stand against this.
|
we need maor sweden plz.
gogo
|
On February 22 2009 20:54 H wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) What do you want me to do about it? :| I only learned of this last week. I'm waiting to see what happens when businesses/universities get their internet shut down.
That's an interesting point. What would happen if people starting file-sharing on a public network? I guess there's ways to identify who's doing it, but on a large scale I think that's unrealistic. They can't just shut down internet to an entire school or business, can they?
|
Correct me if im wrong, I've been told that New Zealand is often a testbed for technologies and legislations because we are so isolated.
So maybe today is us, tomorrow is you guys. 
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On February 23 2009 09:05 Centric wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 20:54 H wrote:On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) What do you want me to do about it? :| I only learned of this last week. I'm waiting to see what happens when businesses/universities get their internet shut down. That's an interesting point. What would happen if people starting file-sharing on a public network? I guess there's ways to identify who's doing it, but on a large scale I think that's unrealistic. They can't just shut down internet to an entire school or business, can they? yes they can, and a lot of small business owners are concerns about the impact of this law because if they lose internet for a day theyre pretty fucked.
|
Sigh. Not sure whether I should risk torrenting on the university connection. Sure wouldn't liked to be disconnected from that without warning Maybe I should I just stop torrenting altogether.
On February 23 2009 09:12 furymonkey wrote:Correct me if im wrong, I've been told that New Zealand is often a testbed for technologies and legislations because we are so isolated. So maybe today is us, tomorrow is you guys.
I just learnt yesterday that NZ was the first country to implement the graduated liscening scheme. Good on us for that, but not so good on us for this new legislation coming in T_T
|
I though you have to have all 3 strikes before they can disconnect you, each time you receive a strike they will send you a warning.
|
On February 22 2009 19:34 Nytefish wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) Geeks on the internet make up a small proportion of a country's population and an even smaller proportion of "willing to protest" citizens. Everyone should be concerned with these kind of laws, but they're just ignorant.
the same reason there are so many bad tech patents. We basically have the baby boomers making up the majority of society, and they are largely technologically inept.
Until the majority of people are technologically competent, this is going to keep happening, because people don't even know/understand/care whats happening to their online rights
|
|
|
who is suspected of breaking copyright law
Thats nice who wants to start a company in NZ and just accuse random NZ ip or torrenting something and send their IP a letter which will turn off their service.
|
|
|
On February 23 2009 09:35 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2009 09:05 Centric wrote:On February 22 2009 20:54 H wrote:On February 22 2009 19:28 fight_or_flight wrote:
Why do citizens let this stuff happen? (and its not just in NZ) What do you want me to do about it? :| I only learned of this last week. I'm waiting to see what happens when businesses/universities get their internet shut down. That's an interesting point. What would happen if people starting file-sharing on a public network? I guess there's ways to identify who's doing it, but on a large scale I think that's unrealistic. They can't just shut down internet to an entire school or business, can they? yes they can, and a lot of small business owners are concerns about the impact of this law because if they lose internet for a day theyre pretty fucked.
Wow that is retarded.
|
wow this sure sux ballz
hope it doesnt happen here in u.s.
|
What the government dickhead fail to understand is that data and their representation as contents are a new kind of commodity these days. It is an essential service and sustain the western culture and society.
To let media companies lobbyiest get away with this is putting the profit of companies and their will of maintaining their market dominance before the need of the people.
If government try to force you to buy one particular type of bread what would you do? if government try to tell you that because you happen to live in Australia, you must eat white bread what would you do? what if i want to eat rice instead?
this is essential what it comes to, people are contend and happy to pay for a service but there aren't any and when forced to seek the contents in other ways they are punished for it. give me my bread, i will pay supermarket price, put the bread and all kinds of bread everywhere that i can find. that's what need to be done. not punishing and try to threaten people that help themselves when you can't provide the bread.
|
The only time pirating is morally acceptable is when it is impossible to get the items in shops in your country. Otherwise it is just grabby geeks wanting to get their sweaty hands on more free shit. Internet piracy....does not....sustain....western culture..
|
I'm not talking about piracy. I'm talking about contents distribution. The ability to share information and gain access to all kinds of different information from different places is what sustains western culture. By allowing one group of corporates control that is putting their interest beyond the interest of the people and my argument is that contents distribution has become an essential service in our lives and it is not reasonable to only let media companies have control of that when it is such an integrated part of our culture.
Do you pirate for free shits? that makes you maybe one tenth of of the serious sharers outthere. If you are really into sharing scene you would know what i'm talking about.
|
For example, Australia TV do not show any SCI-FIs or crappy SCI-FIs and they show them in the odd hours and show them in random order.
I could not even buy DVDs of some of the shows because guess what, sony decided they won't distribute in my region. How is that reasonable, why am i not allowed to watch shows because i live in the southern hemisphere?
Amazon do not even ship stuff to my region. I can't fucking buy Japanese porns because they don't distribute globablly? what am i suppose to do? Why the fuck am i not allowed to purchase steam accounts in asia and use in Australia and i have to pay fucking insane conversaion rates in USD to get one here?
Why is our movies come in to cinemas 6 months behind everyone else? can you think of any other reason other than the intention of warner trying to butt fuck me and sustain their market control here?
|
On February 23 2009 00:53 Ingenol wrote:
I like how people says "why do citizens let this happen?" as if anyone in any country anywhere has any real power to change the course of their government.
Look what we did in Sweden, the government tried to get a new law in so that they could spy in your emails and internet trafic, but everyone demonstrated like hell everyday and the government changed their mind a bit and changed a lot of key factors of the law.
On February 23 2009 19:20 HamerD wrote:
The only time pirating is morally acceptable is when it is impossible to get the items in shops in your country. Otherwise it is just grabby geeks wanting to get their sweaty hands on more free shit. Internet piracy....does not....sustain....western culture..
Everybody downloads illegally these days. Everyone. Even old people do. No one buys anything at all these days unless you are a fan of that perticular band or something.
|
On February 23 2009 00:56 Ingenol wrote:
I will however also add that downloading copywritten things is stealing, period. You are getting value for nothing. I vehemently disagree that the ISP/government/anyone other than the person who commits the act should be held responsible for this, but the individual who does it should be punished.
i see no problem with getting value for nothing
why do you ?
getting things you can't afford/wouldn't bother to pay for/ is harmless imho, the profit loss is imaginary
sure, it can't be made into a law, so we have the laws we have, i don't argue those
i'm just interested whether you take it personally
|
You still need to pay for the contents. But it should not be restrictive or as expensive as they are now.
The whole argument is not about the legality of piracy but rather the continual misguided business model that corporates trying to keep shivel down our throats.
They need to understand that the consumer is in charge of the market not them but everything till now is evident that they still think they can continue like it was. They are putting their short-term profit above the interest of the people who are making them money. This is what i have a beef with.
|
i feel pretty lucky that i dont live in NZ
as im a huge fan of those "copyrighted" things...
|
Wow that sucks donkeyballs. :o
|
Zurich15328 Posts
Today was a good day.
Apparently the law in question has been put on hold in NZ. At the same time a similar legislation that had been suggested on European Union level has been rejected.
|
On February 23 2009 19:20 HamerD wrote:
The only time pirating is morally acceptable is when it is impossible to get the items in shops in your country. Otherwise it is just grabby geeks wanting to get their sweaty hands on more free shit. Internet piracy....does not....sustain....western culture..
Grabby geeks wanting to get their sweaty hands on more free shit
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
Way to lose all credibility when making a point, faggot.
|
If there were the option of paying to get a series I like, such as BSG, or LOST, or house, streamed realtime with the TV, or even 1 hour later (so they can max theyr ad profit from TV) id do it
But since they wanna fall behind and fight progress, im gonna keep downloading everything I can and blow my rapidshare limit everytime.
|
Gah!
Bloody National. First workers rights... then lazy internet bum's rights... whats next?
|
On February 23 2009 01:02 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2009 00:56 Ingenol wrote:
I will however also add that downloading copywritten things is stealing, period. You are getting value for nothing. I vehemently disagree that the ISP/government/anyone other than the person who commits the act should be held responsible for this, but the individual who does it should be punished. Yes, fair enough. But this law is ridiculous - if you are even suspected of committing such acts your internet access is removed. That is independent whether the person is guilty or not - which is just wrong.
I completely agree. This law is frightening.
|
It is frightening. In a world where net usage is constantly on the rise and people are becoming more and more tied to the internet whether they like it or not... the ability to ban anybody on a whim is far too much power to be in the hands of people only looking out for their shareholders.
This fight of free speech and internet censorship has been a long time coming... but I didn't expect the opening salvo to be released by the New Zealand government.
|
Good news!
Sorry for the double post, but I just found an article on the front page of http://www.nzherald.co.nz, one of our countries main newspapers. You can read the article, regarding the government's decision to stall the law here.
+ Show Spoiler [Article] +The Government has stalled a proposed law to enforce copyright on the internet after a "web roots" protest that blacked out sites yesterday.
Prime Minister John Key conceded that Section 92a of the Copyright Act could be "problematic", and suggested it could be thrown out.
The clause would require internet service providers (ISPs) to disconnect users who download pirated material such as movies or songs.
The clause has been widely condemned as "unworkable" and allowing "guilt by accusation" because there would be no independent scrutiny of claims made by copyright holders against users.
Opponents say it could unfairly punish businesses or families when the downloading is done without their knowledge by an employee or family member or by someone hacking into their connection.
Supporters say these suggestions are scaremongering, and that the new law is aimed only at large-scale and repeat piracy.
Internet users have been "blacking out" their web presence in protest at Section 92a.
The protest culminated yesterday when most of New Zealand's major blogs took down their sites, replacing them with a black notice.
Section 92a was to have come into force this weekend, but Mr Key said it would be delayed a month while ISPs and copyright holders continued efforts to work out a voluntary agreement on how it would be enforced.
He said if they could not agree, the clause would be suspended.
If they did reach an agreement, it would be reviewed in six months.
"Our preference is for the parties to reach a compromise and the law to work properly. If it doesn't, we will change it," the PM said.
He had been unaware of the concerns over the clause until the blackout protest intensified last week.
Section 92 was removed by a parliamentary select committee last year, but was put back into the legislation by then-Labour Government minister Judith Tizard - with National's support.
But in Government, National has changed its position.
"We've had a chance to reflect on that," said Mr Key.
Protest organiser Bronwyn Holloway-Smith said more than 16,000 people had signed the protest.
She praised the Government for responding to the public outcry.
Ms Holloway-Smith said the Copyright Act was still flawed and did nothing to protect the rights of users.
"Section 92 is broken and it needs to be fixed."
The act puts the onus on ISPs to cut internet users' connections when they are notified of piracy by copyright-holders, but does not spell out a process for doing this.
The Telecommunications Carriers' Forum, representing large internet service providers such as Telecom, TelstraClear and Vodafone, said Section 92a was vague, ambiguous and not sustainable.
Forum chief executive Ralph Chivers said a delay was helpful, and an interim agreement was likely to be reached, but the Government would still have to be clear about a suitable process for disconnection.
Mr Chivers said an independent adjudicator, such as a senior barrister, could be used in the interim.
A long-term solution could be a government function such as a "copyright court" or making decisions subject to appeal to the Disputes Tribunal.
Recording Industry Association chief executive Campbell Smith said the organisation was happy to have an independent adjudicator, and a Government-funded one would be useful.
He said the creative industry was being badly hit by piracy; 19 of every 20 songs were being illegally downloaded.
|
GOOD! I still can't believe NZ have unlimited internet, and we have to pay premium for crappy download caps.
|
We have caps as well. I pay $60 nzd, ~ $40 usd for 20 gigs a month.
|
then....just change ur ip and proxy it? O.O
|
Lol. Name one person in the world who has used internet that didn't break copyright laws.
I also find this ironic as one of John Key's campaign pledges was to spend on millions of dollars on making NZ internet better especially for teens.
Then again, politicians dont exactly always keep their word
|
On February 23 2009 23:02 zatic wrote:
Today was a good day.
Apparently the law in question has been put on hold in NZ. At the same time a similar legislation that had been suggested on European Union level has been rejected.
Has been rejected but I know France is still trying to implement it 'La loi : Création et Internet"...
We heven had a politician saying he was against interoperability because he wanted people to be free to use whatever software they wanted... His logic fails and I'm scared that these kind of people vote for laws when they clearly have no clue what they are talking about... T.T
|
On February 23 2009 20:21 Zoler wrote:
Everybody downloads illegally these days. Everyone. Even old people do. No one buys anything at all these days unless you are a fan of that perticular band or something.
This doesn't mean it's not stealing, this doesn't mean it's right, and this doesn't mean it's any different in theory than breaking into your house and taking food out of your refrigerator.
Where's the incentive for anyone to create anything if people will get the value from it without compensation?
Edit: that said, the people prosecuted should be the individual file sharers, not the ISPs, etc.. Trying to force ISPs to regulate their customers is what leads to bogus legislation such as this.
|
It's not stealing if the act is to obtain an essential service denied unfairly that can not be obtained anywhere else.
No one should argue that we don't pay for movies. But it is not reasonable to let media moguls have the power that they do now.
Champions league is on tomorrow and the only legal way for me to watch it live is get foxtel which cost an arm and leg and is on a 24 months contract... how is it fair you tell me... of course i'm going to sopcast their ass.
|
hmm if I think my internet just got pulled, how do I find out?
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
|
51451 Posts
On February 24 2009 22:18 haduken wrote:
It's not stealing if the act is to obtain an essential service denied unfairly that can not be obtained anywhere else.
No one should argue that we don't pay for movies. But it is not reasonable to let media moguls have the power that they do now.
Champions league is on tomorrow and the only legal way for me to watch it live is get foxtel which cost an arm and leg and is on a 24 months contract... how is it fair you tell me... of course i'm going to sopcast their ass.
sbs dawg
|
Hopefully this law won't be followed through very well.
Also i bet John Keys kids use bittorrent.
|
|
|
Glad the NZ government woke up. Now if only the Australian government would follow suit over Internet Filtering and the NBN.
|
On February 23 2009 03:49 Boblion wrote:
Might happen here too quite soon...
Stupid old people and medias don't even understand what is going on ...
I thought this was already in effect? I'm living in Paris atm and I'm really careful with my internet use due to the 3 time strike law that started in January 2009.
|
Did you guys see the blacklist that leaked about what the govt was blockijng?? pretty whacky.
|
I don't understand how one can utter sustaining Western Civilization on one hand, and then speak of disregarding all negative obligations which one disapproves of. Every commonwealth is a political compromise where certain rights are restricted to maximize the security and essence of one's essential rights. Because of my private disagreement with a public law, it does not follow that those laws have broken the social contract under which I am obliged to observe them, nor can any society function on the basis of legislation by private conscience.
|
On March 24 2009 23:52 Hawk wrote:
Did you guys see the blacklist that leaked about what the govt was blockijng?? pretty whacky.
I've heard that part of it was faked, i.e. more (legal) URLs were inserted before the leaking.
I'm not saying that's true though, because I dont' know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
