Studios' Oz Power-Grab Revealed

Xiroth writes "More details are beginning to come out about the lawsuit launched by film studios in Australia. According to law experts familiar with the case, the studios seek to force the ISPs to become 'police, judge, and executioner,' effectively giving the studios the legal clout to switch off ISP customers' internet connection at will. Apparently the ISP iiNet is the unlucky victim for the test case as, unlike other ISPs, they refused to pass on infringement notices to their customers."

Comments

Glad someone's fighting

[MoonBuggy]

I'm liking the sound of these iiNet people - they were the ones who wanted to say a big 'screw you' to the proposed government censorship scheme, too. Any Aussies care to comment on whether they're actually the good guys or not?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

They're one of the better ISP's yeah. I hate their adds though!

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

What I'm wondering is why iiNet is the *only* ISP getting sued. Is it the dominant service provider in Oz or is it somehow acting as a safe haven for some pretty egregious examples of copyright infringement? Usually when the banhammer starts swinging, it's not limited to one target.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Oqnet]

They are probably testing the waters with one ISP to get precedent that they can use against other ISP's. It looks from the article that they are the third largest ISP in the region. They probably don't want to go after the bigger ones first but they don't want to tackle a small ISP as well. I would guess this is just the first step in setting up a system for their benifit.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[StikyPad]

I'm not an Aussie, but I think it's unproductive (and often counter-productive) to try to label companies or people as "good" or "bad." This particular action appears to be good. Nuff said.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[quinks]

Internode and iiNet are the two awesome ISPs in this country, although there are lots of smaller ones. You'll want to avoid the ISPs that charge $180/GB on any of their plans for excess usage such as Telstra, Dodo or Optus. This is not a typo. That's 180 Australian Dollars for every Gigabyte you go over your allowance. For example, Optus's 'Yes Fusion $79 plan comes with 4 GB and $150 for every Gigabyte over that. Needless to say, they've got their had stuck up so far their own bottom that they can see daylight through their own ears. But even they completely oppose the plan.

A certain Mark Newton who works for Internode is also an extremely outspoken critic of the censorship plan. But Telstra, iiNet and Internode, likely 3 out of the biggest 5 ISPs all have important people saying that the filtering won't work.

Broadband Choice is an excellent overview of the choices out there. Check out Whirlpool if you want to know more about the situation.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[emil10001]

You don't think 'good' and 'bad' are helpful adjectives to describe a company to a friend who might be interesting in purchasing services from said company and who will eventually need to deal with said company?

Two examples, Comcast and Netlix. I've read quite a bit actions that both companies have taken, and have been on the phone with both companies several times. If I were referring a friend for a high-speed internet service, I probably wouldn't recommend Comcast because I think that they are a 'bad' company. They do things like throttle your internet connection if you're using bit-torrent, regardless if it's for completely legal purposes or not. They are lobbying for a tiered internet. They are rarely pleasant or on time to service calls, and calling their customer service center is an exercise in futility.

Netflix, on the other hand, I would recommend as a 'good' company, because they are constantly doing things that bennefit their customers. For example, they have been working very hard to bring streaming movies to people. I just got that ability with the latest xbox update, and it's awesome (really good quality too). They are also very good on the phone. The CSRs will really try to help you, and if you have some sort of technical question, they put you on the phone with somebody who understands and can answer your question!

So, in short, I think that labeling companies as 'good' and 'bad' is helpful. If a company is falling into the 'bad' category, and they don't want to be there, then they need to get off their ass and figure out what put them there.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Z00L00K]

And there should be a court order for each case before any action is taken against an ISP customer.

If I was an ISP I would first ask for any kind of court ruling in each case before providing any information to the *AA:s.

If we allow bypassing of the legal system then we can end up with companies and organizations fabricating evidence just to silence people.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Precisely. A quick read through consumeraffairs.org shows that some companies trend "good" and some trend "bad". Like Honda is good, and Hyundai is bad. (I had to get that car analogy in there.) ;-)

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

The head of iiNet was interviewed about censorship on the Canadian station CBC podcast Search Engine: http://www.cbc.ca/searchengine/blog/2008/11/podcast_10_is_up.html

They were interviewed because an Australian minister stated that countries like Canada already have nation wide filtering (which Canada doesn't). He really needed to compare the scheme with China, Saudi Arabia and other fine repressive regimes.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[MobyDisk]

It's kind of like the Borg:

The individuals who joined the collective weren't really evil people. The Borg will assimilate anyone. But once they become part of the collective mindset, they have one goal, and that goal can really only be achieved in an evil way.

Corporations tend to work the same way. Most of the individuals are not evil, but they contribute toward a whole that is going in an evil direction. Some time it is tough to take a step back and go "if I do this, they could use it for something else..." I always wonder who was the jerk who wrote the "virus" that went on the Sony BMG music CD's that disabled the ability to burn CDs as a form of copy protection. Surely that person knew what he/she was doing was wrong. But in other cases it is more gray. The same tools can be used for good or evil. And if evil makes you more profit, well.. that is what happens.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

In which case The People will take action to silence the Corporations' tyrannical CEOs.

James Madison, U.S. Congress, 1789: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a FREE country..." [emphasis added]

"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson
Founder of the Democratic Party
"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Maybe this is why I keep getting fired. I refuse to give-up my individualism for the corporate collective. ;-)

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Missing_dc]

Too bad we are talking about Australia, who is not governed by the US Constitution.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[YttriumOxide]

I left Australia coming up on 2 years ago, so maybe things have changed, but Optus cable always seemed very good to me. Speeds were consistently reasonable (approx 10Mbit down, 1.5Mbit up), price was $69.95 a month, and it was capped to 12GB a month (with a "bonus" 24GB for offpeak, so if I wanted to download something big, I'd do it off peak, giving me effectively 36GB a month if managed properly). Only downloads were counted towards the limit - uploads were unlimited. If I went over the limit (the 12GB OR the 24GB) my speed would be throttled to theoretically 64Kbit (however NO extra charge), but due to very low latency, it didn't feel too bad unless downloading big stuff (I'd actually actively try to hit my limit every month at around the 29th or so). If I hit the limit early, I'd just call them and get upgraded to the next plan up for that month only (an extra $30 or so, for a fair few more GB).

Now, my plan here in Germany is far superior due to no caps, faster speed and lower price, so I can't really say I'm missing what I had with Optus, but it definitely seems better than that deal you describe on their "Yes Fusion" plan... Can there really be that much discrepancy between their plans? Or have they just gone completely evil and no longer offer the kind of plan I had?

(just to note: I lived in a house in Sydney (Chatswood to be precise), and so getting cable was no problem... I believe it's not so easy in an apartment or some other suburbs/cities)

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

I refuse to give-up my nudism for the corporate collective. ;-)

Fixed that for ya.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

It's kind of like the Borg:

So they're a rip off of a Dr Who villan. '

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Australians don't have guns to shoot tyrants?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Atrox666]

I think if you used a good branding iron to label these people as bad it might be more productive.

I don't want these people to have a happy life. I want to live in a society free from those who would take my fundimental rights to free expression.

I consider these people enemies of freedom more than any goat herder in Iraq.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[mr_mischief]

The quotes hold, though. It is wicked and disgraceful to convince people not to provide for their own protection. In a world with predators, the unarmed are known as prey.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[geckipede]

There do exist forms of justice more subtle than the lynch mob.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[mr_mischief]

Well, if by "like Canada" he means it is a sovereign nation, has a large land area, is resource-rich, and sells a lot of its stuff to the US, then he's only being deceptive and can't be caught in an outright falsehood. China's not very much like Canada in most ways, though. Even a superficial glance at the news coverage from each country could tell you that.

This is an ages old trick of the trade for con artists and fraudsters. A con tells his mark something that's worded very ambiguously. He makes sure what the mark understands is patently false, but covers his ass with some fanciful alternate meaning. That way the con can blame the mark for moving forward with the deal without a clear understanding of the terms.

I know the con and fraudster labels get bandied about for politicians and bureaucrats all the time. In this case, it seems they might be especially fitting. He's either lying through his teeth, severely deranged, or counting on one of Wikipedia's favorite tricks to catch: weasel words.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Bearhouse]

FTA:

Seven of the world's biggest film studios and the Seven Network last week filed suit against iiNet, Australia's third largest ISP, in the Federal Court.

They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.

iiNet, and the industry body, the Internet Industry Association, say ISPs should not be required to take action against any customers until they have been found guilty of an offence by the courts.

Amen to that last part. So seems like 'good guys' to me - but probably more worried about 1. Losing clients 2. Having to do the work than being pioneers of net freedom.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Bending-over and taking it? If you lose all your cases in court, and you're not willing to use the gun to shoot a tyrannical RIAA CEO, then that's the only recourse I see left.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Which one? I don't recall any "collective machine-based villain" in Doctor Who?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Amazing Quantum Man]

The Cybermen?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[geckipede]

Can you really not see possibilities for resolving corporate censorship that don't involve murder? Public ridicule via channels they don't control, for example. Public image is important to companies. If you choose to go through the legal route and fail in court, that's not the end of it. If the law is against you, campaign to get the law changed.

If you shoot somebody without having overwhelming popular support for your actions, you'll only make things worse and get locked up. If you do happen to have overwhelming popular support, you don't need violence anyway.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[rohan972]

Australians don't have guns to shoot tyrants?

No, tyrant shooting (as well as self-defence) is not a legally valid reason to own a gun here :(

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[StikyPad]

You don't think 'good' and 'bad' are helpful adjectives to describe a company to a friend who might be interesting in purchasing services from said company and who will eventually need to deal with said company?

No, I don't. If I were said friend, I'd rather know specifics, such as what my money is or is not supporting by patronizing said company, rather than the value judgments you assign to those actions as a whole. Labeling collectives as good or bad is even more difficult, time consuming, and pointless than doing the same for an individual, or even the specific action of an individual. For all I know, Netflix makes their DVD envelopes out of aborted baby skin, and Comcast donates a portion of their physical resources to finding a cure for cancer. Comcast may suck, but the alternative might be worse. Netflix might be great, but there might be another company that offers the same service at a lower cost. As I said, I think it's more productive to discuss specific action; not necessarily in a vacuum, but at least without the stigma of subjective moral labels.

In this particular case, I support the specific action of iiNet in challenging the current regulations, regardless of whether or not they worship Satan or rape homeless grandmothers*.

* For profit or otherwise.

Addendum: No part of this post should be taken to mean that I condone, or not, the worship of Satan, or the raping of anyone irrespective of how many generations of offspring they have or have not birthed, or that I believe that iiNet has any relationship to said practices.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Opr33Opr33]

It's kind of like the Borg:

So they're a rip off of a Dr Who villan. '

I consider myself a fan of both Star Trek and Doctor Who and I don't remember the Borg meeting the Doctor. You need to turn in your geek card.

(if I'm in error let me know and I'll instruct my geek card to commit Hara-kiri)

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[CaptainDefragged]

I am an Aussie and I can tell you that iiNet and Internode are the good guys in so far as an ISP can be good or bad.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[CaptainDefragged]

No, they took all of our guns off us. Only the cops, criminals, and heavily restricted sporting shooters have guns here.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[CaptainDefragged]

The Daleks?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Hotawa Hawk-eye]

Can you really not see possibilities for resolving corporate censorship that don't involve murder?

I can. If it only takes three complaints to require an ISP to kick off a customer, that should hold whether that customer is an individual or, say, the business connection of a film studio, right? Did the article say anything about whether the complaint had to be a sworn statement (i.e. "under penalty of perjury") or not? If not, well, I think there are more than a few people who would be willing to turn the letter of the law against the studios.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[FreakWent]

femtech are also very very good, a small ISP in QLD.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Intertrode?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Fluffeh]

The only two larger ISPs in Australia are both massive Telco's. They aren't stupid enough to go after someone like Telstra or Optus on silly lawsuits like this.

I figure that they are going to try to make iiNet pay and pay and pay for the lawyers until they either quit wanting to pay or it scares the others enough not to play hardball like iiNet did. Personally I am with Internode (another decent ISP but not one of the biggest) and if I should ever need to change, I think I will support iiNet for standing up to both common sense and going in to bat for the small guy (That means sticking up for the underdog for you Americans :) by the way).

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

The Cybermen?

The fact that this isn't immediately obvious to everyone here weaknes my hope for humanity.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

It's kind of like the Borg:

So they're a rip off of a Dr Who villan. '

I consider myself a fan of both Star Trek and Doctor Who and I don't remember the Borg meeting the Doctor. You need to turn in your geek card. (if I'm in error let me know and I'll instruct my geek card to commit Hara-kiri)

Instruct your geek card to start writing a haiku in preperation for it';s death.

The Cybermen were mechanically enchanced people who forced other's to join them by "upgrading" them. Replace the word upgrade with assimilate and you the Borg.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Merls the Sneaky]

No the unlimited and unlimited pro are no longer available, I am lucky to be grandfathered in on that plan.

I would say fusion plans are very similar to Telstras mediocre lineup.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Starayo]

I just heard an ad for a "massive" 3GB. Suffice it to say that if you go over the limit on that one, you're going to be paying through the nose.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[QuantumG]

I always wonder who was the jerk who wrote the "virus" that went on the Sony BMG music CD's that disabled the ability to burn CDs as a form of copy protection. Surely that person knew what he/she was doing was wrong.

So now it's a virus eh? I tell ya, geeks play an awesome game of telephone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal

At the time, the use of the term "root kit" to describe the malware on the CD was considered a semantic stretch, because the intent of the word had been lost. Of course, since then, the term has come to mean exactly what appeared on these CDs. So we're just going to have to let that one go.

I think what you're talking about is XCD, developed by then First4Internet (now Fortium Technologies Ltd) in the UK. I'm sure the person who wrote it knew exactly what it was for and didn't consider it "evil" or "bad" in any way. That's why people use terms like "copy protection".. it causes cognitive dissonance. "Copy protection" doesn't "protect" copies, or anything else for that matter. But people who work for a company providing copy protection software are likely to believe they are "protecting" someone. Less so than if the term was "copy restrictions", as it should be.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Malekin]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a FREE country..."

I call bullshit.

As I recently heard Lessig point out, the US government is less popular with its constituents these days than it was preceding the American revolution. Your economy is circling the drain. You have massive and growing separation of the rich and poor. You've had almost a decade of politicians shitting on your rights and your founding principles.

The time for you to mobilise your well-regulated militia was long ago. And you know what happened? Nothing.

It's about time you stopped being so naïve. It's clear the governments of developed and developing nations have no greater fear of a population of gun nuts than of flower-wielding hippies. Neither community will sacrifice their bread and circuses so long as they can vote for a new guy in the next election. Fair and transparent democracy is the best and most natural defence of a free nation, not the possibility of slaughtering a stack of your fellow countrymen in the name of revolution. All that gets you is the sort of political stability we see in Niger and Darfur.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[sambo1]

Yep I'm an aussie with IInet and they are a good ISP. I've been with them since dial up days about 12 years and they always choose the smart option. They are fighting the movie thing, the internet filtering thing, have included itunes downloads and watching ABC on replay via the net in their quota (which most Australian ISP's do not), jump started the ADSL 2+ push and have announced IPTV just recently. And have given every iinet user a download limit bump for free at least once so you get more than what you were paying for - its all I think a good ISP should do.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, you're not too bright, are you?

Also, you don't seem to know what whitespace devices are, or how they work.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[jaxtherat]

The two *good* ISPs with a track record of ethical policies and behaviour are:

iinet (iinet.net.au)
internode (internode.on)

Altough I have to say in terms of pioneering affordable and not shit broadband in Australia, internode deserve a lot of cudos:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internode_Systems#Milestones

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[DimmO]

In a world with predators...

That's the point, right there. no guns = no predators.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[bug1]

I agree.

AFAIK they were both ISP's before telco's became ISP's they survived the mergers.

iiNet has been one of companies standing up to telstra (X Aussie telco Monopolist) with their ADSL pricing, and was one of the first companies to roll out ADSL2

iiNet started as a "backyard" buisness and has given me the sense that they understood the customer; you know, that feeling you dont get from a telco.

DISCLAIMER: I liked them so much i bought some shares in them (and made a little money), but i dont own any at the moment.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[swamp_ig]

Fortunatly not. Gun control here is quite tight. Less guns = less people shot.

After working in an emergency department here, and visiting one in the USA, I think that's generally a good thing. You're more likley to shoot a member of your own family than an intruder if there's a gun in the house.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[swamp_ig]

it's = its.
other's = others.

Learn how to use the apostrophe.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[jaxtherat]

*applauds*

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

How is that counter-productive? Should a company not be able to earn a good reputation?

I think a company which consistantly acts in the best interests of its customers should be labled good and consequently get more business for it.. whats the insentive to do so otherwise? and the opposite holds in my opinion too

Martin

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

NO, sensibly we got rid of most guns in our society about 8 years ago. Best thing we ever did.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably because being telcos Telstra and Optus have common carrier status. Common carrier status is greyer for ISPs like iiNet. I bet the record companies are really trying to determine whether ISPs have common carrier status. If they are found not to then the flood of litigation starts.

As an Australian, I hope the racketeers who are running the record companies all meet a horrible end. Go iiNet!

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not bad - decent service, not too expensive (by Australian standards), usage quotas aren't too restrictive (again, by Australian standards), support is average (but better than the two bigger ISPs - Optus and Telstra).

As I see it, they just want to be a carrier. They don't want to have to filter access, or search for copyright infringements, or police the internet, or any of the other crap that the Australian government or the entertainment industry want them to do.

All that stuff gets in the way of providing their core products (internet access and VOIP), adding huge additional costs, and providing absolutely no benefit whatsoever to their customers. So it's only natural that they don't want to do it.

They also, along with a couple of other ISPs, got sick of waiting for Telstra to implement ADSL2, so went out and installed their own DSLAMs everywhere, finally pushing Telstra into offering ADSL2 just to compete.

On the filp side, they're known over here for buying out just about any ISP smaller than they are, earning them the nickname iiBorg. They bought our ISP (thankfully - they actually do a far better job than the old one ever did), and several dozen others in the past few years. Including a few that used to offer somewhat better deals than iiNet, but don't anymore.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Common carriers are listed on ACMA's website. Interestingly iiNet's name isn't in the list.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

They do things like throttle your internet connection if you're using bit-torrent

You're making Comcast look better than they actually are. Last I checked, Comcast wasn't throttling high-bandwidth-use connections based on torrent use, but fraudulently forging RST packets of any torrent connection regardless of file size/bandwidth being used.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

I am an Aussie and use iiNet, by far the best ISP I have used here (and I have been through my fair share)

Fundamentally, I don't believe ISP's have the duty to, nor the technical competence, to verify the veracity or relevance of the "evidence" presented to them. Maybe the media companies can force the govt into working for them and protecting their archaic ways, but I don't think they can get everyone to do so. Forwarding onto the police as they did, is their best and most reasonable course of action

Good on them for sticking to what they believed is the right course of action.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[slater86]

Its not that they aren't handing them on at all, They seem to be handing them to the Police and getting them to sort it out instead of getting involved. Personally I have no problem that that approach and I think it is better.
The lawsuit appears to be because the studios think that isn't enough.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

iinet are a really great ISP. We changed to them, initially, because the other big ISP's make you take on a long term contract when you join up. But if you have to move house in that time, it costs hundreds of dollars in disconnection fees. We have been burned by this situation too many times, and were happy when we moved into an area where we could join iinet. Their service is comprehensive, fast, their prices are great, and if you have to move, they don't charge you to disconnect and you don't have to take out a contract.

With regards to their tangle with the film companies, iinet did the right thing by Australian law. Their terms of use state that they will certainly disconnect the services of law breakers *when the crime has been proven to exist legally*.

However, in this case, the film companies wished to by-pass the expense of proving that crimes had in fact occurred, and chose to bully iinet into action based on allegations only. Are allegations proof? Not by Australian law, they're not.

What it boils down to is the film companies want to pass on the expense and hassle of proving copyright violations. They want someone else to police it, and fund that policing. That doesn't sound fair to me. Why should small ISP's with far fewer financial resources than film companies, shoulder their legal expenses & responsibilities? And what incentive would there be, then, for allegations of copyright infringement to be accurate?

I don't see how or why iinet can lose this case. They did everything right by Australian law and should not be penalised.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[pluther]

Hell, even if it is "under penalty of perjury", I bet there are a lot of people willing to risk it just to mess with the studios.

If enough (and, in this case, "enough" is a pretty small number - probably under a thousand) of them do it, then the studios would easily be overwhelmed trying to get their connections back over and over, and the perjury cases could clog the courts for years.

And, do you have to be an Australian citizen to file a complaint, or can I do it from here?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Philip Shaw]

That's the new cybermen. The old ones had become pure robot by the time the doctor met them, and had replaced their brains with computers.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

it's = its. other's = others.

Learn how to use the apostrophe.

My poor grammar only highlights the depth of my rage.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[phyrz]

In this post MM says they got carrier status in 2000.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1079033&r=17059102#r17059102

Funny its not on the list you supplied though. Perhaps carrier status is different than common carrier? It doesn't look like it though, there are a lot of ISPs smaller than iiNet on there.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[smegged]

An interesting analogy given that iiNet is often referred to as iiBorg given their corporate policy of assimilating smaller ISPs.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[deniable]

The legal contents of our gun safe would beg to differ, but ours are tools for work.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[deniable]

Actually, gun ownership rates haven't changed much in decades. The only change was removing the semi-autos and replacing them with bolt actions. That being said, we didn't have a lot of guns to start with.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

That's the new cybermen. The old ones had become pure robot by the time the doctor met them, and had replaced their brains with computers.

No the new ones are the third incarnation and the ones with the eletronic brains are the second. The original cybermen from "The Tenth Planet" episode had organic brains still.

Wikipedia supports me on this.
If you can find a more authorative source by all means bring it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberman

.....ok I think I'll better go otside for a minute before I forget what the sun looks like.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[gfim]

I don't think that's true. According to the Optus web site (under Broadband):

Flat monthly rates- your connection speed will be slowed when you exceed your data allowance and so you don't get charged excess usage fees.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[ozphx]

I wouldn't be putting the US system forward as a role model for gun control. Population control perhaps...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

You have a 1 in 25000 chance of getting killed by some lunatic with a gun, and a fair chance of shooting yourself by mistake. Go USA! Keep it up...

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[TSPhoenix]

If we all had infinite time then sure, but when a friend rings saying they're moving into the new place tomorrow and they want to get internet up and running ASAP and want to know who you recommend, you think anyone is going to wait for you? Incomplete information is a fact of life and the better use you can make of it the better off you are.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. If I wasn't already with Internode, This would make me switch to iinet. As it is, I'd be glad to donate to iinet's defense fund, if neccessary.

I'm not really worried about this - IMHO the Australian courts have a track record of making sensible decisions, so the studios will end up being laughed out of court - they're trying to redefine the 'innocent until proven guilty' thing, and as far as the law is concerned, iinet are doing the right thing by handing the complaints to the police.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[gfim]

Sorry - forget my above comment. I didn't read yours properly.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Less guns = less people shot == more defenseless people = more stabbings, beatings & stealing

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Yes because banning drugs has clearly stopped the criminals from getting them. /end sarcasm. What makes you think banning guns would work any better?

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Cybermen don't have a collective consciousness. They are all individuals... each one with a separate and distinct brain. (At least that's how it was in the Old Doctor Who, therefore Star Trek writers couldn't have copied the idea.)

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Copy protection to prevent my copying of a brand-new CD is fine. Taking over my computer's control so I can't copy other CDs is not.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

as an aussie, I have to admit that my opinion of iinet has massively improved in the past month or so. They were my isp of choice 4-5 years ago, offering the best plans available, but eventually they were overtaken by other cheaper isps (at least in terms of quota each month. remember, in australia there are no isps that do unlimited plans). there's a part of me that almost feels like changing isps to support their positive stance for australians internet rights, but I just cant bring myself to pay more for less quota (and subject myself to filtering trials).

This is one where I have to thank them for taking one for the team, but have to hope they'll understand why I wont join them in doing so

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[theaveng]

Nope... they don't have a collective consciousness either. They are all individuals.

The collective consciousness was the key Borg ingredient that made them so scary & unstoppable. They could repair their ship simply by thinking. Also they were the antithesis of the individuality that the Federation embraced. If you join the Borg, "you" no longer exists. It becomes we.

I'm not aware of any Doctor Who villain that had the same "we are all one organism" feature.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Heather D]

Well put. We're quite good at talking about taking a stand but I doubt we'd actually do it even if 'they' did start taking people away in the night.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an Aussie, and as an Aussie I know that in this field there are good guys and bad guys. iiNet are part of the good team since they seem to be more concerned with providing a great deal to their subscribers than screwing them, which makes them awesome. Not all ISPs are like that, Telstra will charge thousands of dollars for exceeding the quota you bought for the month by a few gigabytes without telling you, iiNet won't do that, which makes them definitively good. Their only major problem is annoying ads with this stupid Irish git on them, which is why I am with Internode, another good Australian ISP but doesn't advertise on television with that annoying tool. Internode is also from South Australia, the same state that is abusing its constitutional powers to ban us from playing violent video games. I think it's a beautiful piece of irony considering what I generally use my connection for.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Gotta say, love the way the US government harnesses the paranoid individualism of Americans to increase gun ownership for population control. That's the sort of evil only a Henry Kissinger could have come up with.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Amazing Quantum Man]

I was kind of thinking about the new-series Cybermen. They seem to be more drone-like than the older ones.

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[Anonymous Coward]

what? like public stoning? I always like throwing stones... not at people, just in general

Re:Glad someone's fighting

[genner]

Cybermen don't have a collective consciousness. They are all individuals... each one with a separate and distinct brain. (At least that's how it was in the Old Doctor Who, therefore Star Trek writers couldn't have copied the idea.)

They where still organic beings who "improved" themselves with cybernetics and then proceeded to "upgrade" others against their will. Still very Borge-esq even with their individual minds.

Will EFF intervene ?

[unity100]

im frequently donating to EFF for such lawsuits. i wonder if they are gonna go into this one too.

Re:Will EFF intervene ?

[CRiMSON]

Is the EFF in .au? I thought EFF was a .us thing.

Re:Will EFF intervene ?

[Zatar]

The EFF mostly works in the US for obvious reasons, but they do international work as well.

Re:Will EFF intervene ?

[Gideon Fubar]

We have an EFA instead. The .au brand of the US based group.

Their site is exactly where you'd expect it.

Re:Will EFF intervene ?

[TapeCutter]

The EFA is not affiliated with the EFF but it does much the same thing and the two often collaborate.

Re:Will EFF intervene ?

[Philip Shaw]

There is Electronic Frontiers Australia, which is a similar organisation, but I'm not sure if they are actually affiliated with the EFF or not.

The only reason I see to oppose this

[MikeRT]

Is that if they have enough evidence to make you get shut off the net, they have enough evidence to sue you. Stop passing the buck and file a lawsuit, jackasses.

Re:The only reason I see to oppose this

[R4nneko]

One of the reasons why they don't want to do that is that in Australia, the most they can get from anyone they sue is linked to the damages they suffered from them committing piracy. i.e. The cost of going to see the movie/purchasing the show on DVD, etc.

This gets especially squirrelly when you are talking about stuff on free to air.

This combines further with the aspect of the Australian legal system that means that the loser often has to pay most of the winner's legal fees. Especially if they had offered to settle for less/more than the damages awarded. So the prospect of going after the individual is especially painful and risky to these companies.

This information obtained mostly through here.

I agree that they really should be going for a the pirates but I can see why they really do not want to.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Democracy

[mfh]

I pay taxes because I know my money is going towards good things that people need, like road, schools, special services, the military, utilities, and infrastructure. I want their opinions left out of that equation -- notice these are all SUPPORT based activities. I want my government to support me but not to interfere with me.

But now they want to spend money on things like controlling the Internet. While I think there are arguments for regulation I could support in theory, nearly all of the arguments I must reject, as they tend to conflict a free society.

When you no longer live in a democracy it is your duty to overthrow your government, especially if they interrupt your valuable World of Warcraft time!!!

Re:Democracy

[maxume]

Have tried not paying your taxes?

I suspect you pay taxes because your employer takes them out of your paycheck.

Re:Democracy

[theaveng]

It's possible to lay-down 15 exemptions, and thereby keep the paycheck garnishment to a minimum. On Apirl 15 you will then be handed a bill of ~$10,000 by the IRS which you can choose not to pay.

The IRS will come after you of course, but Henry David Thoreau argued in the early 1800s that refusal to pay tax is a form of civil disobedience to let the politicians know you are not happy. Mr. Thoreau spent much time in jail to protest an ongoing war for which he refused to pay taxes.

Re:Democracy

[maxume]

My point was that if the O.P. isn't willing to take such actions, his "I pay taxes because" is empty rhetoric.

Re:Democracy

[theaveng]

Yes and I explained what procedure to follow to stop paying taxes... even the automatic income tax deductions.

Wild leap of logic

[$RANDOMLUSER]

They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.

So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.

Re:Wild leap of logic

[Culture20]

They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.

So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.

No, it means the MAFIAA authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent people from pirating movies and TV shows. Don't expose their failed logic; use it against them.

Re:Wild leap of logic

[msormune]

Well yes, if the 9/11 terrorists bought their explosives and guns from the said Jews, Catholic Church and the Masons.

But like you said, a wild leap of logic indeed :)

Re:Wild leap of logic

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be childish; the has validity in the sense that iiNet was in a position where they had the ability to stop pirated movies and their participation was required to make the piracy possible. Not at all like your analogy of some random named groups being responsible for an event in which they had absolutely no involvement.

Man, we really need a corollary of Godwin's Law for 9/11.

Re:Wild leap of logic

[mjwx]

They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.

So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.

Actually the Australian Federation Against Copywrong Theft (our new MPIAA equivalent) is claiming that iiNet knew about the infringement but still did nothing to prevent it. Whilst this is a little more solid and less outrageous then your version but its still a tenuous link at best. I have faith in the Australian court system, the chances of the case getting an ignorant judge is not good, which means that the MPIAA equivalent will need to provide actual evidence against iiNet and iiNet is in a good position to simply release the lawyers. There's a good reason this hasn't been tried in AU before.

Also It's good that MSM in AU has made no secret about who is really behind the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft, three out of the big four movie studio's were mentioned in the article before the name of their shell organisation.

Re:Wild leap of logic

[Falconhell]

the chances of the case getting an ignorant judge is not good,

One of the bonuses of not allowing the public to elect judges, which must be the most ridiculous leagal concept I can imagine,

Re:Wild leap of logic

[Anonymous Coward]

aren't we all guilty then? and continually guilty, given that we still fly airplanes of a similar size, have buildings of a similar size, and live in a world of ever increasing terrorist (CIA, FBI, NSA, etc) activity? If the government flies another plane into a skyscraper, it's all of our faults for not standing up and bringing these conspiracy "theories" to a public arena larger than slashdot or infowars or cnn. The internet and tv rock, but if there aren't people on the street willing to stand down from their daily lives to confront the accused, then we become the living embodiment of sheeple.

Remember the iiNet doesn't sound right but

[zappepcs]

It might be a good idea to practice saying it. This is a test case and Australia hasn't been too pro-customer from what I've seen lately. Does anyone have any links or data that could link this case to US government, RIAA, MPAA, or any of their legal teams?

Maybe group-sourcing will work to find something to help the fight.

Re:Remember the iiNet doesn't sound right but

[TapeCutter]

"Does anyone have any links or data that could link this case to US government, RIAA, MPAA, or any of their legal teams?"

US government: The lawsuit is a test case of provisions in the AU-US Free Trade Agreement, the FTA had chunks of the millenium act inserted into it, fortunately pharmacuticals were exempt from the FTA.

*AA's: Same studios, different shop front.

Legal team: Lead by the same bloke who extracted $100M from Kazza.

The mandatory filtering thing is a dead horse since the legislation won't pass the senate and everyone knows it, however the iiNet thing is a real threat.

Even Wilder leap of logic

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if you believe that those groups were somehow supplying the terrorists involved in some direct manner.

It's an ISP. Not just some random group that one can accuse of having some conspiratorial role with flimsy evidence. They had customers. They knew who those customers were, and apparently somebody else could find out what those customers were doing and well...it turned out to be illegal. Yet they refused to do anything about it.

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[$RANDOMLUSER]

So an eyewitness is as guilty as the perpetrator?
So General Motors and their dealerships are responsible for thousands of instances of vehicular manslaughter?

I'm sorry, I don't think I like "authorized by failing to prevent" as a legal precedence.

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[Bearhouse]

So, your electric utility company should cut you off too, since you're using electric power to perform your illegal act?

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[mr_mischief]

There is a standard way for police to get incriminating evidence from a third party in the free world, such as logs from an ISP of who was using what IP address at the time of a crime.

In the US this is called a subpoena. It often referred to simply as a "court order", although a subpoena is a specific type of court order.

I was in charge of providing evidence to law enforcement for a multiple different ISPs over the years. Our policy was that a friendly fax or letter from an officer was enough in cases of child porn or in which they believed someone was in immediate danger. In all other cases, we required a subpoena.

It can take significant labor on the part of the ISP to provide the evidence needed for proper law enforcement in copyright, fraud, harassment, or any other kind of online crime. They come to the admin staff wanting to know who had a particular IP at a particular time according to their witness. When you account for possible time skew and approximation, there may be two or three possible names for them for a single incident due to lease changes. They often come with multiple reports of the same behavior on multiple IPs at multiple times. The ISP needs to compile the list of user accounts that have used each IP for half an hour or so before or after the stated time, see which user accounts make a trend over the multiple complaints, and explain to the officers what the logs mean and that they are not in themselves damning evidence. Customers can have trojan bots on their systems being used by others or could have had their authentication information stolen after all. Many people write it down and a teenager's "friend" leaves the house with a copy. I've seen that many times in fact.

So, is it the ISP's job to alienate customers by cutting their service (which they are often under contract to provide) without proof the customer had any ill intent? Is it the ISP's job to weigh the evidence the studio presents? I don't think so. Leave laws to the law enforcement and courts. Leave admins to run the damn networks.

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[Anonymous Coward]

So an eyewitness is as guilty as the perpetrator?

It's called Duty to Rescue in my state, or Good Samaritan Laws in other countries.

In this case, the entity that had a right to be rescued is the Aussie film studios.

I didn't RTF, so I don't actually know if its being positioned that way. But yes, an eyewitness can be held accountable for not helping. The laws are intended to protect rescuers, but also provide penalties for non action.

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't like "authorised by failing to prevent" then you certainly won't like current copyright laws, the DMCA etc. And unfortunately for us Aussies, whole chunks of the DMCA were put into our copyright laws fairly recently to "harmonise" our laws with yours.

Funny how we didn't "harmonise" on fair use, isn't it? Yes, that's right, Australia doesn't have a law guaranteeing fair use (although it has generally been held up as a right by the courts, AFAIK, IANAL).

Re:Even Wilder leap of logic

[Dracophile]

Too bad, apparently. "Seven of the world's biggest film studios and the Seven Network" seem to think that "authorized by failing to prevent" as a legal precedence is a great idea. You might want to moan at them about it. I'm going to.

To iiNet Customers

[MozeeToby]

Do everything you can to be suspicious without violating any laws. Download dozens of distrobutions of Linux, send massive files to your friends anything to get yourself noticed. Then, when they cut off your access, complain and complain and keep complaining until they either give in or give up.

Seriously, these test cases exist for a reason, show the ISP how much business it will cost them, show the government how many false positives they will get. It can't hurt and (if they aren't a buch of corrupt fools) it could help.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[Microlith]

Download dozens of distrobutions of Linux

What makes you think that they'd see a large transfer and instantly go "OMG HE'S DOWNLOADING A MOVIE"?

They've done stupid shit before but c'mon, that's ridiculous. Unless you seriously believe they sit on Linux torrents and C&D the people on them.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[theaveng]

That's a good tactic, but it only works if you have an ISP that is limiting access (like Comcast). My ISP is Verizon and they apparently don't care what I download, even though I'm maxing out my line at 100 KB/s.

But if Verizon started limiting my access based on content, then yes I think bit-torrenting millions of copies of Linus sounds like a good method of protest. I could then sue Verizon on the grounds that they are blocking my LEGAL access to public domain and free-to-download software.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[theaveng]

Correction:

"But if Verizon started limiting my access based on [my usage of bittorrent]....."

Re:To iiNet Customers

[GenP]

...millions of copies of Linus...

When did he upload?!

Re:To iiNet Customers

[theaveng]

No. The most-likely problem is the ISP will try to block bittorrent usage. Even for legal downloads like Linux. As a form of protest, you then attempt to grab lots and lots of copies of Linux (via bittorrent) as a way to protest, and sue the company on the grounds that they are blocking legal access to free software and violating contract/neutrality.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[JStegmaier]

I think bit-torrenting millions of copies of Linus sounds like a good method of protest.

First they map the genome, now we pass around clones of people on the Internet. It's amazing how far technology has come.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[theaveng]

Yep, but I'll be even more impressed when they invent little tiny robots to clean the cholesterol out of my arteries. That way I can eat artery-clogging pizza and not feel guilty about it!

Re:To iiNet Customers

[genner]

No. The most-likely problem is the ISP

I doubt they'll try this as every WOW player in Australia would not longer be able to update their game.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[theaveng]

RIAA cares?

Re:To iiNet Customers

[genner]

RIAA cares?

Because Blizzard has the money to fight back. Bulleys only pick on people weaker than themselves.

Re:To iiNet Customers

[Starayo]

Doesn't work like that here in Australia. We have a cap set, and once we pass that cap, we get slowed, unless we're with one of the worse ISPs, in which case we pay a few hundred dollars a gigabyte extra. "Unlimited" doesn't exist, what it really means (according to advertisements) is you get 12GB and then you're slowed.

On the subject of such things, one reason I love my ISP, Internode, is that they mirror everything from linux distributions to game patches and clients that their customers can download unmetered.

Incitement?

[Mikkeles]

'... the studios seek to force the ISPs to become 'police, judge, and executioner'...'

So, the studios are inciting the ISP to commit a felony?

WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[elrous0]

First they government wants to set up a nationwide firewall, now this? WTF is going on down there? I mean, I thought the *U.S.* was bad. Isn't Australia supposed to be all European open and sophisticated, unlike us puritanical Americans?

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Anonymous Coward]

what would you have them do? Australia is full of criminals, and these are reasonable actions to keep them corralled. A bunch of people walking around with bad attitudes, large knives, and strange accents talking about barbies and mates and dingos. I'm just glad they are a continent unto themselves.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Drakkenmensch]

"Think of the CHILDREN! Won't somebody pleeeeease think of the CHILDREN?!?"

Australia itself is not at fault, neither is the majority of the population who would be quite content to continue being a bastion of open-minded free thinking (much like most of Canada, which I'm proud to live in). No, if there's any blame to assign here, it should be directed squarely at the two groups at fault: Greedy, amoral media executives who would be all too happy to set up a global dictature where their content, flawed and awful as it might get, would be rewarded with mountains of ill-gotten cash as well as power-hungry politicians who take advantage of the aforementionned corporate suits to create a FUD campaign directed at the latest target of "threats against The Children", the Interwebs.

It's not like they have many targets left, now that dancing, rock and roll and comic books have gained wide mainstream acceptance in not being tools of corruption forged in Lucifer's workshop.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[theaveng]

The E.U. is hardly open. I mean, you can't even wear an attractive Swastika pin without getting arrested by the polizei. Where's the freedom in that? ;-)

But seriously there are a lot of ways that the E.U. is less free than America. Particularly in the area of self-defense against criminals (you cannot). The taxes are ridiculously high (60 cents/gallon versus $4/gallon) and overall just a more-restrictive society.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Isn't Australia supposed to be all European open and sophisticated, unlike us puritanical Americans?

Definitely not... Australia is VERY Americanised. They even do that weird short "a" in words that are pronounced elsewhere with a long "a" (words like "dance", "chance", "plant", "advance" etc). You can think of Australia as basically just another collection of US states but a bit more laid back (read: "lazy") and with some strange expressions/sayings and far too many poisonous animals.

Oddly, the next door neighbour, New Zealand, is MUCH more European.

I'm a New Zealander that lived in Australia for 6 years and different parts of Europe for 4 so far (living in Germany at the moment), and I've also visited the US for work on quite a few occasions, so I'm not just "assuming" things here - these comments are based on my experience of the places. They ARE just my personal experience and opinions though - your experiences may differ!

The closest relationships in culture/"feel" that I've noticed are between cities rather than countries though:

• Hannover, Germany <> Wellington, New Zealand
• Brno, Czech Republic <> Christchurch, New Zealand
• Inverness, Scotland <> Dunedin, New Zealand
• Sydney, NSW, Australia <> New York City, NY, US (especially: Sydney Centre and North Sydney <> Manhattan and: Sydney Inner West <> Queens)
• Brisbane, QLD, Australia <> Los Angeles, CA, US
• Melbourne, VIC, Australia <> Seattle, WA, US

There are places that break this mould though... off the top of my head:

• Auckland, NZ <> Chicago, IL, US
• Adelaide, SA, AU <> Nowhere specific, but distinctly "small town British" feeling

Note #1: Personally I prefer NZ/EU culture rather than US/AU, but it really is a matter of what you prefer... if you like EU, you'll probably like most of NZ; if you like US, you'll probably like most of AU.

Note #2: When I say "EU", "Europe" or "European" in this post, I'm more or less referring to Western, Northern and Central Europe, and excluding southern Europe a bit... the culture in places like Spain, Italy and even the south of France tends to be quite different in a lot of ways.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

But seriously there are a lot of ways that the E.U. is less free than America ..... and overall just a more-restrictive society.

Depends on your viewpoint actually... I find Europe to be much more free than the US with regards to the culture, even if the law is technically a little more restrictive (in many, but not all, ways).

First, where you're right: It's true that if I walk down the street here in Germany doing my best Hitler impression I could technically be arrested (although I don't know if they would do so in practice - I'm not game to find out), and it's also true that even in the case of self defence against criminals, one must be careful to avoid injuring the criminal beyond what is necessary to stop them committing the crime (it's NOT true you can't defend yourself though! AND violent crime is pretty rare, so it's less of an issue)...
It's also true that taxes here are very high - I pay nearly 50% of my income in taxes, plus reasonably high taxes on things I buy, especially petrol. I accept this though, because I can see the benefits of these taxes in the society around me (clean cities, no homeless people begging on the streets for change, low crime, excellent public transport, and much more)

HOWEVER, as I said, there's the cultural/social side to consider. For example, here in Europe:

• You can say "fuck" on TV without people getting offended or the word being "bleeped"
• Prostitution is legal (in most of Europe, but not all)
• There's no such thing as "indecent exposure"
• People are tolerant/accepting of "non mainstream" lifestyles (even if they don't agree with them or like them) - I'd feel distinctly unsafe walking through most places in the US wearing a cravat shirt and gothic makeup, whereas here in Europe I'll hardly get a second glance (no matter how weird they think I am, they'll leave me alone)
• Due to not being paranoid about everyone and crime rates being pretty low, it's okay to leave your child unattended or with a stranger for a minute while you go do something
• If I get caught with an illegal narcotic, I will NOT go to prison (unless it's an excessive amount, or I'm trying to take it over a border or something)
• I can drive as fast as I like on the Autobahn

If none of these things interest you (or even if you're actively against these things), fine... but we like it the way we have it, so you shouldn't think even for a second that we're all oppressed and struggling under authoritarian regimes on this side of the pond!

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[drsmithy]

But seriously there are a lot of ways that the E.U. is less free than America. Particularly in the area of self-defense against criminals (you cannot).

You can, but it must be proportional. Knocking someone who attacks you to the ground is OK, f'r instance, but you can't shoot someone just because they're trespassing.

There are just as many ways Europe is "freer" than the US, as vice versa. For example, drinking in public is typically both legal, and quite acceptable.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[radish]

I've only visited Sydney a few times, but I live in NYC, and I really wouldn't consider them very similar at all. Maybe some of the suburbs (which you relate to Queens) are more closely related, but for the areas of Sydney I know best (around the bridge/harbour/opera house/kings cross) I'd say it's more like SF. Or maybe it's changed a lot since I was last there - that would be a shame.

I do completely agree that Aus tends towards the US and NZ Europe though. I was hitch hiking through that part of the world years ago and given some sage advice: If you want to get a lift in NZ put a British flag on your pack, if you want to get a lift in Aus put any _other_ flag on it :) I found Canadian worked well!

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Yeh, around Darling Harbour (Opera House, Bridge, etc), it's definitely more like what I imagine San Fran to be like (but I haven't been to SF so can't say for sure). Walking down George street definitely not though, which is what I think of when I think of "city" for Sydney. I was living in Sydney for the 6 years that I was in Oz, and I really did grow to dislike it. It's a great city at first, and I think most tourists probably love it because they don't get stuck with it for too long, but when you're there for a while, you really start getting the same feel that I felt in Manhattan - there's the glitz and glamour over the top (although VERY vacuous "sex and the city" type), with a really seedy underbelly below it that will rear its ugly head once you've been lured in.

And the sage advice you were given is good... but as for NZ, any European flag will do (some mainland European flags will get better reactions than British depending on what part of NZ you're going through (a Dutch flag works well pretty much everywhere) - British is still 100% fine though). The Canadian flag also works well pretty much everywhere in the world off the North American continent since it's easily recognisable as a symbol that says "hey, I may sound like one, but I am NOT American!" (just as most people in that part of the world can't tell the difference between NZ and AU accents (they're VERY different!), we can't tell the difference between American and Canadian accents)

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[CaptainDefragged]

Don't forget the US Free Trade Agreement our government signed us up for. Thanks for that. Now we get to have DMCA like rules, MAFIAA/RIAA browbeating and destruction of our medical system by "Big Pharma".

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Well, aren't you just the politest of the polite, Mr Troll?

I lived in Sydney for 6 years, however have travelled right across Australia (and much of the world). I specifically said in my post that it was my own opinion and feelings about the places and that your experiences may well be different. My experiences with Brisbane (and L.A.) have been extremely negative. I've also got some good friends from Brisbane, so I know it doesn't exclusively produce dickheads, but I did meet far too many while I was there (I've been there about 10 times, average of perhaps 5 days each time). Unfortunately, all you seem to be doing with your post is adding some weight to the dickhead side of the scale.

By the way, I'm not sure where you read my "little /. blog" that says I stayed completely in Sydney for 6 years... I'm pretty sure that's not written anywhere in any post I've written or elsewhere...

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I tend to agree with your assessment, but I would have left out the 'fuck off' bit personally. I have lived in Brizzy for about 25 years, and I still think it is a great big country town, it probably isn't comparable to any city in the US (that I know of). I have lived in Sydney, San Francisco (well, Walnut Creek), parts of England, and Brisbane is where I want to stay and raise my kids. Great place, but not in any way USAian, AFAIK.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[kramulous]

Listen up troll, and you are that. You've posted 5 times in this thread and four have been bitchin, with racist undertones, off-topic. That classifies as a troll. Don't think I'll stand idly by while you call me lazy.

I have a *major* problem when somebody spends a couple of nights in a city and then claims they know all about the locals and their culture. I can understand that you love your NZ, fair point. But don't rag on some country because you had a few minor hickups. Chances are you brought it upon yourself by making the sort of claims you've demonstrated here. I'd also be looking at the sort of people you were associating with to be in those sort of areas in the first place, let alone getting into the situations that you did. Guess what, that would happen in any country you visit when you offend the locals.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Listen up troll, and you are that.

The moderators seem to think differently...

four have been bitchin, with racist undertones

Racist? Woah... sorry, what?! I readily admit to intolerance of fools and arseholes, but the race of the person makes NO difference to me whatsoever. I couldn't care less what someone's race is - I'll either like 'em or dislike 'em, but either way it's for who they are, not where they're from.

Don't think I'll stand idly by while you call me lazy

I didn't call YOU lazy... I didn't call any specific individual lazy... I DID say that Australia is generally lazy, which is something I stand by. The culture there is one of "she'll be right mate" and "beer o'clock". What I mean by my statement is that when averaged out, the "everyman" Aussie is lazier than the "everyman" from many other countries. There are of course MANY fine hard working individuals from Australia, just as from other places, but that doesn't change the fact that on average, the culture is one of laziness (and is even celebrated as such by the population and media there)

I can understand that you love your NZ

NZ's great in its own way, as is Australia. I do prefer NZ on the balance of things, but obviously from the fact that I DID spend 6 years in Oz, it's not such a big deal to me...

Chances are you brought it upon yourself by making the sort of claims you've demonstrated here. I'd also be looking at the sort of people you were associating with to be in those sort of areas in the first place, let alone getting into the situations that you did. Guess what, that would happen in any country you visit when you offend the locals.

I find it interesting that you brought up racism at the start of your post, because actually that's one of the things I found really quite appalling in Brisbane... Let me tell you two short stories and then you tell me how either of these were my fault:

Story 1: Trip to a burger shop for lunch
I was on a business trip, visiting a re-seller of the company I work for. I was helping the techs there with some issues at a customer. We finished at the customer and then went back to the office. Because we had further stuff to do in the afternoon and there wasn't enough time for a "real" lunch, we decided to hit a local burger shop just down the road and then eat it in the office.
Back in the office with our food, someone queried where we got it. When the guy I was with answered, he was scolded for shopping at "that place" because he was "giving the Italians money".
I had to bite my tongue to stay professional...

Story 2: A truck and a group of aboriginal children

I was on a different business trip, this time visiting the Brisbane branch of our company. I was standing outside smoking a cigarette, and was chatting to one of the guys who worked in the warehouse. As we were talking, a truck started to turn in to make a delivery and it had to stop as some aboriginal children (probably between 6 and 8 years old) were walking past on the footpath. The guy from the warehouse muttered, "shoulda hit the little black cunts" (not even a trace of humour in his voice - he meant it).
Unlike my previous story, I did not have to remain professional in this instance (branch rather than re-seller), so I just turned to the guy and said, "what the fuck? They're just kids... how the hell do they deserve that?"
His answer? "They're just fuckin' abbos.", followed by spitting on the ground and walking inside to end the conversation.

Now, yes, I KNOW that not all people from Brisbane are racist. I KNOW that most would also be shocked and disturbed by the above two stories, but the simple fact that this has happened to me TWICE in Brisbane, whereas I've never experienced this in any other modern western city does somewhat lend itself to a disfavourable viewpoint... Also, for reference, th

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Falconhell]

Yeh,sure, I would ask the opinion of a Kiwi on Australia.

New Zealand has a huge inferiority complex regarding Australia. Doesnt help that, yet again we thrashed them in the first test match at the Gabba either.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Gideon Fubar]

Iocaine Powder. It's the only solution.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's from New Zealand, of COURSE he is an inbred retard!

He cant even take his girfriend to watch the Kiwis lose, cause she might jump the fence and start grazing....

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Gideon Fubar]

Sorry sir, As a native Australian, i must inform you that you are off your rocker.

While both of our cultures have European roots, they've both been equally influenced by the US. Saying that NZ is more "European" just shows that you hold it (and Europe) in higher regard than the US and Australia. Your comparisons, from what i can see, aren't even remotely accurate..

Please note that I actually think New Zealand is a lovely place, i just think you're romanticising a bit.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just don't mention the League, eh?

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[mjwx]

By the looks of it the filter may fail before it even begins. The Greens (the Australian Green Party) is talking about pulling its support for the filter. Seeing as the Green vote primarily comes from Hippies other open minded individuals (liberal as in liberalism) the Greens are thinking about their chances of re-election by going against this unpopular move.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn, nah nobody cares about the league outside Sydney!

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[ozphx]

Actually to be perfectly frank, China is more "effectively free" than the US. Sure... theres a bit of Legalism going on, but that basically boils down to "Don't be a dick".

You can pretty much do what you like. In Australia I can't do things like modify my car or house without permission. I can't bend the most trivial of laws (without being a dick about it) - ie: speeding on a deserted freeway. I can't open my business when I like, or do business where I like. I can't sell food unless I have a approved kitchen in expensive stainless steel. I can't keep a bloody chicken in my backyard! I have to register my pets!

Sure, theres very little corruption, but the same shit some corrupt official in China _might_ hassle you over - you are guaranteed to get fined for here by some cop trying to meet quota :P

I can't even legally kill myself when all the over-regulation gets too much! FFS!

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Philip Shaw]

The short vowels, especially 'a's, is a peculiarity of Melbournians and southern Victorians, and is less prominent closer to the River Murray.

The use of Americanisms is lower outside the eastern cities, although still far too common for my taste.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[ozphx]

Australians have a "she'll be right mate" and "beer o clock" attitude, which is right up there alongside "your business your risk". As in "If you want me to come in on a weekend, you will be paying overtime rates, if I feel like it".

We don't subscribe to the "employer owns your arse" attitude of the US. Perhaps that makes us seem lazy?

We do things for our mates, or for money. We certainly aren't stupid enough to think we have any other obligation to our employers.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Yeh,sure, I would ask the opinion of a Kiwi on Australia.

Did you miss the bit where I said that I lived in Australia for 6 years? For the record, while I was born and raised in NZ, I've spent only slightly over half of my life there. I'm far from a "typical Kiwi" in my thoughts and attitudes and do believe that I am not biased by any kind of nationalism (I consider nationalism to be just another "bad 'ism'").

New Zealand has a huge inferiority complex regarding Australia.

No... NZ does not have an "inferiority complex" regarding Australia... This is a similar thing to when people say that most of the world has an inferiority complex about the US - it sounds potentially reasonable, but is actually a load of crap.

Most New Zealanders that I know are quite proud of their country, and while I'm not really (see comment above about nationalism), I can see what they're proud of. The people like to consider themselves unique and special, because they're the little guys of the world, but still strong enough to stand up and say "No" when things aren't going to their liking. They don't fawn over the whims of ANY of other country (which even many large countries do) and have a strong sense of independence.

Doesnt help that, yet again we thrashed them in the first test match at the Gabba either.

I have no idea what that means... although from the phrase "test match", I assume it's some kind of sporting thing... don't care. Don't care at all.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

While both of our cultures have European roots, they've both been equally influenced by the US. Saying that NZ is more "European" just shows that you hold it (and Europe) in higher regard than the US and Australia. Your comparisons, from what i can see, aren't even remotely accurate..

Interesting that you think I hold NZ in higher regard by saying it's more European... why is being considered more "European" better than being considered more "American"? (note: I actually DO prefer it, as mentioned, but I didn't say that one was inherently better than the other)

Also, I stand by my comparisons... Unfortunately you didn't give me any points to debate other than "you're wrong"... At least you did it politely unlike some other people replying though.

i just think you're romanticising a bit

I don't see how, unless you consider Europe to be somewhere "very special" that I'm trying to elevate NZ to the great heights of. I've spent 4 years of my life in Europe (yeh, not so much, but I'm only 29), including living here right now, and while it's a great part of the world to live, I don't consider it on a special plane whereby comparing anything to it is immediately "romanticising" the place...

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

The short vowels, especially 'a's, is a peculiarity of Melbournians and southern Victorians, and is less prominent closer to the River Murray.

Actually, I was aware of South Australians using short 'a's (in particular, residents of the rather fine city of Adelaide), but from Melbournians, I've always heard the same long 'a' that I heard around me in Sydney. Unfortunately, as I now live half a world away, I can't just go check again so easily, so I might have to bow to your statement on this...

The use of Americanisms is lower outside the eastern cities, although still far too common for my taste.

That, we can 100% agree on...

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Australians have a "she'll be right mate" and "beer o clock" attitude, which is right up there alongside "your business your risk". As in "If you want me to come in on a weekend, you will be paying overtime rates, if I feel like it".
We don't subscribe to the "employer owns your arse" attitude of the US. Perhaps that makes us seem lazy?

All fair enough in concept, but in the degree that I've seen it practiced, it becomes a problem. I don't believe that my employer "owns" me, and if I find them exploiting me by making me work far too long or giving me too much to do, I'll certainly complain (and if they don't remedy the situation, I'll likely look for new work)... BUT I would also continue to do all of the work to the best of my ability right up to the day I walk out the door. Why? Because I'm doing my job, and as a matter of pride in MYSELF, I will do the best job I can do.

I often found "beer o'clock" to cause big problems in Australia. People working with me would often just stop working, half way through doing something, and then go home, just because the clock read those magical number "17:00". The task itself may have only taken an extra 15 minutes to do, but by stopping where they did, they'd have to re-start quite a lot the next morning and end up wasting another 30 minutes or so. I'll work those extra 15 minutes to finish it. Not because my employer "owns" me, but simply because it's the right thing to do and I'm not wasting their time/money.

We do things for our mates, or for money. We certainly aren't stupid enough to think we have any other obligation to our employers.

And that, specifically, is considered a very bad attitude in most of the rest of the world. You do the job for the money, that's true - if they stop paying you, you certainly don't turn up to work anymore! But, you're paid to do a job, not just to be there (note that from your perspective it's okay to say that you're being paid for the time you're there, but from the company's perspective, you're paid for the work). So, if you turn up and waste the company's time, they do NOT owe you anything (if you turn up, are ready to work and they waste your time, that's fine), and you deserve to be fired. Of course, most companies in Australia wouldn't fire you because they're run by people with the same work ethic as the employees...

I do my job well, and often go "beyond the call of duty" in both effort and hours. Not because I owe my employer anything special, but because I owe myself and my society.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

First they government wants to set up a nationwide firewall, now this? WTF is going on down there?

I replied to the other half of your post, with what seems to have been interpreted as flamebait, but I realised I didn't reply to your main question... unfortunately, this reply will also probably get modded flamebait, although it isn't intended as such (nor was my other reply)...

What is going on in Australia is that the people aren't doing anything to stand up for themselves. The government there and many companies have come to realise that as long as what you're doing is just a hair or two away from "completely evil", people will complain and grumble but won't actually stand up and fight. They just sit back and say, "well, she'll be right" and expect it to magically all get better as other people fight for them.

This is especially evident in that Australia is one of the few western democracies that FORCES citizens to vote (if you don't vote you get a hefty fine), because if they didn't, the turnout would be too low to be an accurate representation of the will of the people. (it's debatable whether forced voting gives you the true will of the people anyway, but that's another story)

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

Actually, my last reply may have spoken too soon... there is one point you raised that I'll debate you on...

While both of our cultures have European roots

I think this is a pretty misleading statement really. It's true, as written, but it strongly implies that the people that settled the countries were essentially similar.

I'm not really going to touch on that some significant percentage of the early Australian settlers were criminals - this may or may not have influenced the country's culture and I think it's really impossible to say. Instead, I'll concentrate on free settlers...

Australia was settled primarily by the British at first, with quite a lot of Irish immediately afterwards. These settlers were either part of the system being established (prison colony first, then later "colony") or were simply looking for a new life across the ocean.
In much more recent history, there has been a good deal of influence from the southern European countries (Greek, Italian, etc) and some near east/middle east countries, and China.

New Zealand was settled by the British first also, however after the Maori wars, there was a great deal of influx of people from mainland Europe as well as Ireland and Scotland (Scotland very much so in the deep south). That's why many New Zealand towns have names that are neither British nor Maori in origin. Many of the people going there went to either fight in the Maori wars or as "explorers" (whether right or wrong, Australia was viewed as "place that can be settled" and NZ was viewed as "strange far off land to be explored" - possibly because of the difference in landscape, with NZ having large mountains, dense jungles etc)
Later, NZ's main influences have been similar to what they were in the past - lots of Europeans, both from the British Isles and mainland Europe.

Note that for my description of NZ, I'm somewhat excluding Auckland (1/4 of the population) because the culture in Auckland is entirely different to the rest of the country, and so despite being the largest city, can't really be considered representative of the country as a whole (I pointed that out in my city comparisons also) - most NZers outside of Auckland consider Auckland to be a "wanna-be Australian city" (they're trying, but they've managed to take on every bad aspect of Australia without taking on any of the good aspects of it, rendering them far worse than any Australian city could ever be)

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Xest]

Far from it, from what I've seen in the news at least Australia has unfortunately largely been down the same path as the US since 9/11.

It's a shame because for many of us Brits it's the dream place to visit and migrate to. Beautiful weather and scenery, lovely people with a shared history. Even their national heroes are better, we have neanderthalic retards like David Beckham and they had the awesomeness that was Steve Irwin. Unfortunately though until it's political parties sort their game out I wont even visit let alone consider moving.

No doubt their government will continue to whine and moan about shortages of people specialised in various professions though and sit wondering why people aren't filling them, one of them being IT professionals. Have a look here to see how desperate they are for IT pros:

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/skilled-occupations/occupations-in-demand.htm

Maybe if their government was planing a forward thinking nation technologically and that was hence attractive to IT professionals they'd actually be able to fill some of these shortages. Unfortunately they seem to have taken a leaf from the US and British book where it's all about over the top government control.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[elrous0]

You should be proud. Americans were the ones who finally perfected English. It almost made up for the horror of what the Irish did to the language.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[Gideon Fubar]

I don't disagree with any of what you're saying here, obviously you know your history. It's just that I really didn't see the comparisons as valid in any way.

Also, it seems that you are specifically excluding and disclaiming away discrepancies in your own argument. This looks a lot like shoehorning.. i.e. you're selectively picking and excluding evidence to fit your world view. Of course, since we're just talking about the 'feel of cities', this is entirely valid.. but then so is my criticism.

Of course, calling Brisbane a racist city will get the ire of Brisbanites (even if it is at least partially true)..
Also, you compared this to a small British country town, and that just seemed a bit silly, honestly.

Re:WTF is wrong with Australia these days?

[YttriumOxide]

You're right that I'm deliberately excluding certain places which may make it seem like I'm shoehorning, but I was going for a comparison of "in general", and there will always be exceptions to the rule when doing so. As long as my list of exceptions is shorter than my set of data, I see no problem to do so.

It does seem I've been modded flamebait throughout this thread, so this will be my last post here... my Karma can take it, as generally I only get positive up-mods, but I guess this topic is just too sensitive for some people. (personally, I think it's not reasonable that people "mod with their hearts instead of their heads", but there's really no way to avoid it (you even said "even if it is at least partially true" when referring to racism in Brisbane, which lends credence to the idea that I was raising uncomfortable but valid points, not just trying to incite flames), so I'll just accept it and be done with it)

I think the problem is that most people, yourself included, seem to have completely misinterpreted what I'm saying. Yes, I compared Adelaide to a British country town, but I wasn't comparing what the city looks like, the size of it, or anything like that - I was comparing the culture of the people there. The attitudes and "feel" of the place (a very subjective thing, I know, which is why I put the "this is just my own personal opinion and experiences" disclaimer in my first post on this thread).
Also, the poster from Brisbane that seemed to take offence referred to Brisbane as a "big country town", which is something I've heard from people in both Brisbane and Adelaide on more than one occasion. Considering Brisbane is nearly twice the population of Adelaide, do you consider his statement just as "silly"?

Re:I say let it happen.

[mrdoogee]

"The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." -- John Gilmore

Unless the Media conglomerates and governments get together and shut down the whole grid, and THEN build a new global computer network, AND get the majority of the population to adopt it, this will just be another case of the Old Media tilting at windmills.

ip law is a gentleman's agreement

[circletimessquare]

for a select few major players in the rarefied business of media distribution, circa 1988

now, any pimply faced teenager with a net connection has more distribution power than time warner and bertelsmann in 1988. but the law hasn't changed to reflect that technological change in last 20 years

now, those dying business powers wish to use the laws meant for their private little club to impose their will on a billion teenagers. a billion poor meda hungry teenagers with obfuscation, encryption, spoofing, etc., at their disposal

good luck with that

Climate of fear?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the deal with Australia? Its becoming less attractive as a place to visit every day. Constant attacks on freedom of speech. Its coming across as a climate of fear.

Re:Climate of fear?

[boyter]

Trust me when I say the majority of aussies are pissed off about this stuff. Just yesterday I was talking with workmates and we all agreed that iiNet are awesome for telling the Government and Film studios where they can stick their filter (which they are implementing to show that it wont work) and sue the pants off everyone.

what if they disconnect the wrong person or

[josepha48]

if they disconnect someone who is later found innocent? Will that person be able to sue the ISP and the AU Government?

Well this just seems like the AU gov is really f'd up these days. IMO.

Re:what if they disconnect the wrong person or

[Anonymous Coward]

This court case has nothing to do with the Australian government. It's going through the court to be resolved because that's how disputes are settled over here. The court has NOT ruled for or against anybody yet. Don't jump to conclusions.

And for your information, more than half of our senators in government (Coalition and Greens) oppose the Internet censorship scheme, buddy.

Re:what if they disconnect the wrong person or

[Anonymous Coward]

if they disconnect someone who is later found innocent? Will that person be able to sue the ISP and the AU Government?
Well this just seems like the AU gov is really f'd up these days. IMO.

Will they be able to sue the film company whose notice got them disconnected? One could make a case that negligently sending a false allegation of infringement is libel.

Clearly...

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of slashdot is living with their heads buried in the sand. Or something. Cuz really, you'd be all up in arms if somebody were violating the rights you like, but when it comes to the rights of others, including those big faceless corporations, you're all up in arms!

Re:Clearly...

[jonwil]

I dont think people are arguing that the big media corps shouldn't be allowed to enforce their copyright, only that they should be using the proper means to do so (gather evidence, send a proper subpoena to the ISP or file a john doe lawsuit and then go to court and take on the copyright violator in court) instead of trying to make the ISPs act as copyright cops.

ISPs should NOT have any obligation to pass on legal notices sent by the big media corps to their customers or to act as "copyright cops" for the big media companies. Making the ISPs responsible for copyright violations on their networks is like making the electricity companies liable when someone uses their electricity for a drug lab.

Oz?

[Theaetetus]

Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion, and someone searching for stories about Australia is unlikely to include "Oz" in their search.

Re:Oz?

[Chuck Chunder]

No

Re:Oz?

[speroni]

That's funny, whenever I think of Oz I think of a nightclub in New Orleans.

Re:Oz?

[jassa]

Additionally, Paramount (who own the rights to Oz and are one of the studios suing iiNet) might sue Slashdot for aiding in the distribution of information about the television series, which in turn could directly lead to people downloading episodes of it.

Re:Oz?

[genner]

Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion, and someone searching for stories about Australia is unlikely to include "Oz" in their search.

Oh....that explains why no one thought to ask the wizard for help.

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you please learn the global slang term for Australia? Oz, is Australia, Ozzies, are Australians. Similar to Kiwi for New Zealand...

etc.

Re:Oz?

[Theoboley]

I guess that goes to show how much of a sieve I am, i thought the article was about the TV show as well. Guess I should've RTFA.

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

This. Even after reading the summary I thought the story was about studio's fighting over rights to a prison drama.

Re:Oz?

[mr_mischief]

Screw them. L. Frank Baum's family has living descendants. If anyone has a claim on the name "Oz", it's them.

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oz? Ozie?? Ozzy??? Oi! Oi! Oi!

So confusing.

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

Other nicknames for our beloved country include:

- The land down under
- Land of Oz
- The lucky country (under review atm)
- The sunburnt country

Re:Oz?

[ozphx]

Guess he shouldntve sold the rights then...

Re:Oz?

[geekangel]

Also IINet customers may get sued for infringment re:, you know, that movie...

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Ozzie" is a misspelling of "Aussie".

Re:Oz?

[Anonymous Coward]

After your keyword packed sentence there are likely to be a lot of OZ fans in the future wondering how they ended up on /. :)

Complain to who?

[Shatrat]

I think the whole point is that iiNet isn't doing that sort of thing.

iiNet, and the industry body, the Internet Industry Association, say ISPs should not be required to take action against any customers until they have been found guilty of an offence by the courts.

Saturating your internet connection isn't going to affect a court case one way or the other.
If anything, iiNet customers should write to their ISP to thank them for going to bat for sane copyright enforcement.

Re:Complain to who?

[mr_mischief]

Customers of other providers should also switch to iiNet and cite this as the reason to both the old and new companies for the change.

Re:I say let it happen.

[Mex]

Sure but you need to fight it at some point, because they will eventually try to ban encryption for the average citizen.

"What do you need to hide, hmmm? You need a permit for an encryption license"

Because they're fighting back.

[Xenographic]

> What I'm wondering is why iiNet is the *only* ISP getting sued.

Because they stood up to the studios. Rather than kicking people offline, they forwarded the complaints to the cops because they had no intention of pretending to be policemen.

The summary is inaccurate on that point: they did NOT ignore the complaints. In fact, there are police in the same building as them, so they forwarded all those complaints over to them. The fact that the police did nothing is another matter, but perfectly understandable given the kind of "evidence" they're usually supplied with, especially when there are more important crimes to prosecute.

Anyhow, the studios obviously want to make an example out of the only ISP who isn't willing to play along with their power grabs in order to convince the others to be more compliant.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, since when are the police charged with investigating civil complaints? Not their jurisdiction.

The complaints might be bullshit, but the proper way to deal with them is to actually read them, deal with them if there's a legit claim, or just admit that they're BS (and it would be polite to let the claimants know that) and accept the possibility of the claimants disagreeing and taking it to court (which is, surprise, happening).

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[dontmakemethink]

As I posted in a related thread, they not only did not ignore the complaints, "iiNet will be participating in the trials, mostly to prove that the filters are impractical, unworkable and unwanted." The studios are suing them not for ignoring the complaints, not for refusing to cooperate, but just for being reluctant about cooperating.

Major suckage.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[glittalogik]

This isn't about the filter, this is about supposed P2P piracy.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[boyko.at.netqos]

Is there anything we can do to play hardball with the record companies at this point? I'm tired of simply sitting down and not buying their music and supporting companies and organizations which oppose them with periodic donations.

I'd propose a CD burning party, but first of all, it's a little too "third reich" for me to be totally comfortable with, and second, half the people would show up with laptops and blank discs.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[kaos07]

No, it's because they didn't pass on the complaints to customers and because they're tiny.

For some reason every story about iiNet on Slashdot mentions that it's the "Second largest ISP in Australia". That's just plain wrong. By customer base and by infrastructure it's at least the fourth if not the fifth. And when you considering that the number one ISP, Telstra, has something like 70% market share coming fifth isn't that a big a deal.

And that's the reason they're being targeted. Telstra doesn't pass on the infringement notices either. But they are an ex-government monopoly with immense resources, a lot of customers and a huge profile. iiNet is a minor player and an easy target for the "rights holders".

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[mjwx]

The fact that the police did nothing is another matter

No it isn't. Its not another matter, or even a matter at all.

The police did their job, they looked at the complaint and saw that there was insufficient evidence and that investigating further was a waste of police time. Add to this that copyright infringement is a civil charge not a criminal charge*. For all the complaints I can bring against Perth's (Western Australia) Police Service (not meant to call it the "force" any more, stupid PR) this is not one of them.

The police did not see it as their job to be a private corporations enforcement arm and I'm glad as there are real crimes to be solved out there.

*Just so you know, if you are caught receiving Foxtel (Pay TV) signals illegally or recording in a theatre you are more likely to be charged with "Theft of service" not copyright infringement as Theft of service is a criminal charge and courts in AU will take it more seriously.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[Anonymous Coward]

> especially when there are more important crimes to prosecute.

oh, you mean like their completely over the top focusing on modified cars and speeding?

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[spudda]

The police aren't charged with investigating civil complaints. However under the australian Copyright Act distribution of pirated material has both civil and criminal penalties. Thats irrelevant however, since the reason that these complaints are being forwarded on to police is because AFACT are demanding that iiNet hand over private information identifying which customer belongs to this IP (at the time of the alleged infringement). However under Australian privacy law, ISPs can only be compelled to hand over this information with a court order.... Its the same BS, that MPAA and RIAA try in the USA, mostly without success.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[bh_doc]

You are right, technically, although I wouldn't be so hasty to dismiss any link between the two. I'm sure the mainstream media conglomerates have vested interests in seeing such a filter implemented.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[dontmakemethink]

This isn't about the filter, this is about supposed P2P piracy.

What do you think they're trying to filter? Uninformed Slashdot postings? Clearly not.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[frglrock]

You're partially right.

The last couple of stories have stated that it is the largest and second largest respectively. Completely wrong there, but it is the third largest by a significant margin (and has been for several years)

There is also a significant margin to the next largest (Optus) but it is still a very definite third. A quick google search proves that.

iiNet also has a large amount of infrastructure. Other comments have mentioned that they were the first to roll out ADSL2 and it certainly wasn't on Telstra equipment. Again, their infrastructure isn't to the scale of Optus and Telstra but they do have substantial presence.

You are also partially right on the last point. They aren't going after Telstra or Optus as they have a lot of resources behind them. iiNet is the perfect candidate to test the waters as they have enough marketshare for a win to actually be significant while not having the overpowering resources of the two largest players.

Re:Because they're fighting back.

[CyberPack]

Actually, laptops and blank disks might turn out to be quite an appropriate protest.

The postman always rings twice!

[Ultimate Heretic]

I find it surprising that the anti-file sharing power grabbers have not attempted to enforce the same dictum on physically macroscopic file sharing. After all what is to keep someone from sending a burned copy of a movie to several friends? They had better get the US Post, UPS, FedEx and the rest on the case. Open and rummage through every letter and parcel to be sure that there are no illegal copies of movies or recordings. Those who are not scofflaws have nothing to hide!

Why is this a bad thing?

[gelfling]

For years the ISP's have been able to bring me content, then rat me out and participate in a lawsuit AGAINST me. If anyone wants to put the brakes on illegal internet content then going after the ISP's is the only way to go.

Re:I say let it happen.

[mr_mischief]

A handful of US states have tax stamps for illicit drugs. A drug dealer can (anonymously, presumably) go buy the stamps and affix them to his product and only get charged with the drug violations if police catch him. If he gets caught selling and hasn't paid taxes on the drugs, then they also make him liable for tax evasion charges and back taxes. I can see the same methods being used for anything a government wants banned.

They remind us too much of Oz...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion,

Sorry. The media moguls really do remind people of the characters in Oz, so the confusion is already too deep to fix.

Follow their logic through

[rsmither]

It seems like they always want to go after the ISP. What about the phone company that provides the wire? What about the power company that provides the electricity? Or any other of a number of utilities and companies that provides services to this person?

If I were making illegal widgets, would the company being infringed upon go to the local store where I bought my parts? Again, what of the other number of utilities that provide service to my residence or place of business.

Why should any one of these be held liable just because someone comes to them and says I think someone is doing something illegal and I can sort of prove that is was them or at least someone that lives in the house or possibly neighborhood?

ISPs are no more authorized, nor should they be, to act as law enforcement than any of these other companies. If it is a legal matter, than the police/local authorities should handle it.

Logic Failure

[bryll]

Isn't suing the ISP because of what people do on the internet something akin to suing your local road & traffic authority because some thieves used one of their roads to escape on?

Plug for EFA

[solferino]

If you are concerned about this legal action and the federal government's plans for compulsory filtering, you might like to consider supporting Electronic Frontiers Australia, either by joining or donating.

Case summary from an actual lawyer

[Augury]

An excellent summary of the case can be found here: http://www.lawfont.com/2008/11/21/the-case-against-iinet/

There is a series of Q&A at the end of the article also, which is very informative.

A further piece can be found here, sadly titled "Why iinet will probably lose the piracy lawsuit"

http://apcmag.com/why_iinet_will_probably_lose_the_piracy_lawsuit.htm

It counters some of the seemingly "common sense" defences to this suit:

* iiNet can't disconnect someone for an unproven allegation of piracy
* iiNet is not responsible for user piracy
* iiNet is covered by "safe harbour" provisions

It also has links to the original documents

Read these to see what's really going on here

[driptray]

For those who want to a more in-depth treatment of the issues particular to this case, try these articles:

* The Case Against IINet - In-depth analysis of the legal issues.

* IINet Lawsuit - No Coincidence? - Claims that the lawsuit may be a tactic to force the ISP industry and the Australian govt to use a particular internet filtering product.

Are you kidding?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that Australia gets priority over some unknown TV series.