Slashdot Mirror


Australian ISPs Soon To Become Copyright Cops

srjh writes "In the Australian Federal Government's latest assault on the internet, draft legislation has been released that allows network operators to intercept communications to ensure that their networks are being 'appropriately used.' Such legislation is particularly important given the interference of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy in a recent copyright lawsuit against iiNet, one of the largest ISPs in the country. Conroy called prominent filtering opponent iiNet's inaction over copyright infringement 'stunning,' whereas iiNet claimed that it would be illegal under current Australian law to intercept its users' downloads. While this latest legislation appears to be a concession of that point, the government is said to be watching the case closely and along with attempts to introduce a three-strikes law in Australia, it appears the law will be changed if the government dislikes the outcome of the case. The internet villain of the year just continues to earn his title."

16 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Stephen Conroy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Is an incompetent, idiotic, totalitarian, vindictive, morally bankrupt cunt.

    Same with Rudd. You can assume this assault on the internet is coming from the top.

    1. Re:Stephen Conroy by Stormwatch · · Score: 4, Funny

      ballet box

      Wow! Dancing and fighting at the same time!

    2. Re:Stephen Conroy by Cinnaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The ballet box is the only way to get rid of these goons."

      No it isn't, because Liberal will implement basically the same polcies. We don't have a viable third party so for the forseeable future we will be at the mercy of the same bunch of goons (Labour/Liberal).

    3. Re:Stephen Conroy by Gwala · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's pandering to the Australian Christian Lobby, who are a bunch of self-important wankers and have far too much power for a country where 28% of the population puts down 'atheist/agnostic/no-religion/blank' on the census.

      --
      #!/bin/csh cat $0
    4. Re:Stephen Conroy by dangitman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Except our chicks are hotter.

      Yes, we're well aware of your predilection for farm animals. You can keep that to yourself in future.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  2. Re:Do we want the government watching us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's probably worth reading between the lines here.

    Along with trying to get ISPs to remove all pornography from the internet (laughable, yes, but if you look at the current legislation and current filtering policy, this is exactly what they want to do), the Australian government has been strongly backing copyright lawsuits against ISPs for not snooping on its users.

    This isn't just "we're allowing you to monitor your own networks", it's "monitor your networks for us, or suffer the consequences".

  3. Re:Do we want the government watching us? by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

    When it comes to having a choice between private enterprise providing a good or service and the government providing that good or service,

    I disagree, the government is accountable to me once every four years, a private corporation never has to ask for my consent or co-operation. In addition to this, the governement does not have a profit motive where as a corporation must not only be making a profit they must also be increasing shareholder value. So either way the money needed to run the service comes from my pocket, with the government I get a say in how well they are spending and they dont need to make increasing ammounts of profit on it.

    The idea that a government is inherently inefficient is a misnomer, the same as the idea that a corporation is inherently efficient is a misnomer. Both are inherently neither. Government organisations like Medicare in Australia and our Canadian analogue provide better care and service for a lower cost then the US private health system. I pay A$500 a year for health care.

    As for this bit of stupidity, it will never pass parliament as the internet filter never passed parliament, its already been voted down (thanks to the Green's), despite the fact that the trials are still ongoing (Conroy is permitted to waste taxpayer money on the trial unfortunately). The Rudd government is in a precarious position due to parliaments rejection of their Emissions Trading Scheme. The ETS may be enough to trigger a double dissolution of parliament, which at this point in time would not be entirely a bad thing.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  4. Re:This will never happen. by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please lets vote Turnbull in, enough is enough (already)

    If a Double Dissolution happens Turnbull (or another Lib, I doubt Turnbull could run) that might just happen, so long as no-one utters the words "work choices" they should get in.

    It's bad that we have to choose between two parties, one who wants to be a dictator over my home life and one who wants to be a dictator over my work life.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. Re:This will never happen. by Gwala · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >It's bad that we have to choose between two parties, one who wants to be a dictator over my home life and one who wants to be a dictator over my work life.

    Except we don't have to support one of two parties. Australia's first-past-the-post prefential voting system means if you vote for a small party (such as say the Australian Democrats), you can direct your preferences if they don't get elected -- effectively, vote for the party you want first, then vote for the lesser evils further down, and your vote still goes where you want it to.

    --
    #!/bin/csh cat $0
  6. Re:What's stunning.. by twostix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whatever he is he's a goddamned hypocrite.

    His home state of Victoria of which he is an elected government representative has a law banning "altruistic surrogacy" - that is - having another woman carrying a fertilised egg to term then handing the baby over when it's born.

    Disregarding any moral argument on the matter, it's criminally illegal in Senator Conroys home state. So what do he and his wife do? "Route around" the law by skipping over the border to New South Wales to have it organised WHILE STILL REPRESENTING VICTORIA IN PARLIAMENT.

    So the Victorian minister Stephen Conroy doesn't think he should be subject to the laws of Victoria when he doesn't feel like it (notice he kept his seat in parliament and still lives in Victoria) and the hypocrite thinks he has the moral authority to make judgments to form controversial legislation affecting thousands?!

    Convenient isn't it.

    The more I learn about these Labour goons the less I like them.

    Stupid law in Victoria in my opinion but, so is every law Conroy pushes regarding the Internet I wonder if he'll be understanding to anybody who ignores the federal laws that they don't like.

  7. Australia, who are you? by grrrl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just don't understand where this government's sentiment comes from!! I live in a country that is full of people who are easy going, enjoy life, and who are generally quite non-idealistic - we do not tend to have the passion for politics and causes and pep-talks that seems to drive a lot of US-centric life. And yet the government takes these crazy stands that are SO against the Australian way of living!!

  8. Re:This will never happen. by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As always the opposition party is the opposition. The will always side with the general public to gain votes, gain seats and gain a higher pay packet. What voting for the Greens well and truly demonstrates is the real power of the ballot box in Australia and the ability of Australian politics to resist corporate pressure at this stage not enough but it is growing.

    Three strikes, is dead in Australia, filtering is dying, ISP spying is a no show, all that is happening is the Australian government is being pressured by the US government and the not so free trade agreement, which is basically being used as political blackmail.

    It looks very likely that the greens will gain a lot of public support because the right wing abused their power not so long back and the left wing just ain't left enough. Right and left is really starting to look like minority rich (plus gullible poor) versus everybody else (middle class the survivors and working class with a brain). The internet is driving power and control back to the people and there seems to be a real fight on around seizing back that power by corporations and mass media, that had it for 30 years and they really do not want to let go.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  9. Re:Do we want the government watching us? by WeirdJohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, you do have a say. I contributed to the Green Paper on the Service Card, which was in danger of being owned by Motorola and Gemsmart. It was people like me, giving valid clear technically correct explanations of the failings of that "backdoor ID card" that resulted in it being a no-go. When have YOU been a part of the process - there's nothing to stop you! Have you petitioned parliament? Written to your local member? Shown up to ALP branch meetings and asked polite, informed but pointed questions? It's when everyone says "we have no power over the people we elect" that we give up our power. Fact is that if enough people go on record (by the 3 means I listed above) then politicians listen, purely out of self interest.

  10. Re:Mesh network (poll) by Archon-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Being australian, and being part of the (very muchly mostly useless) mesh network project in AU, here's my thoughts:

    #1- Australian landscape (mountains, bush, vast distances) isn't compatible with mesh networks.
    #2 - You need to get the connection to the internet at some stage.

  11. Re:Do we want the government watching us? by Cimexus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This guy has a point.

    From my experience of living long term in all three of: Australia, USA and UK, there is far more actual power in the people's hands (at election time) in Australia than either of the other two.

    Partly this is because Australia's population is quite low, so there's less 'layers' between the wishes of the people, and the politicians (one example: the Prime Minister of Australia happened walked right past me on the street in Sydney few weeks ago ... but in America you will almost NEVER just 'happen to see the President' when you go out to lunch). Hell the previous Prime Minister went on a walk around the suburbs every morning and waved and said hi to people. Sure he had a few bodyguards trailing him, but nothing like the 30 guards, 20 armored vehicles etc that accompany the US President around.

    But a bigger reason for this is the fact that there are very very strict laws against corporate influence on politics in Australia. And there are similarly tough regulations surrounding what companies are allowed to do when it comes to advertising, donations, etc etc. Far more stringent than in America. Sure there's still lobbyists and things in Australia. But realistically, the corporate world can't do much in politics in Australia, and they know it. In America, it's all about big business and corporations when it comes to setting the political agenda. In Australia, the issues that average people care about really can decide the elections. (See: Work Choices)

    A final but more minor point is that we do have third and fourth political parties that actually matter. They aren't enough to actually take power away from the big two. But due to the preferences system that we have in Australia, it means that minor parties can influence things in Parliament and aren't just there to make up the numbers. In the US however there really is no serious alternative to the Dems and the Republicans.

    Americans like to point to Australia and say "ha, your democracy isn't as good as yours, you don't even directly elect your head of State!". This is true. Our head of State is technically the Queen of England, and our Prime Minister isn't voted in by the people. But in practice, the Australian system reflects the wishes of the public a lot more quickly and more closely. (The Canadian system is like this too I believe, although I haven't spent enough time in Canada to comment).

    Disclaimer: I'm Australian by birth but have lived 8+ years in the US and 4+ years in the UK. I also hold dual US and Australian citizenship, and love both countries dearly. Both have their strong and weak points. But when it comes to government, I'm afraid the Australian system is just ... better.

  12. Re:Mesh network (poll) by jonwil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And how do you propose to link this mesh network to other networks? Its not like you can just plug into the Southern Cross Cable or Australia-Japan Cable to get connectivity to the outside world. Nor can you just plug into fiber links between all the different isolated towns and cities that would be part of this network (and even if it was possible to string up enough wireless boxes to go from Sydney to Melbourne, the latency would be so big as to render it unusable).