Slashdot Mirror


AU Gov't Still Wants ISPs To Solve Illegal Downloads

bennyboy64 writes "Australia's Minister for Communications wants internet providers and the film industry to sit down and work out a solution to stop illegal movie downloads, despite a judge ruling in favor of an internet provider not being responsible for policing illegal downloads. The film studios first dragged internet provider iiNet into the Federal Court back in November 2008, arguing that the ISP infringed copyright by failing to take reasonable steps — including enforcing its own terms and conditions — to prevent customers from copying films and TV shows over its network."

20 of 218 comments (clear)

  1. Here's an idea.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Flood torrent trackers with episodes of Neighbors.

    - NS

    1. Re:Here's an idea.. by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And here's another idea:

      There's a federal election coming up some time this year, and unless I'm mistaken, Conroy's seat will be up for grabs. (Federal Senate terms are for 6 years except in the case of a double dissolution.) How about the Communications Minister gets kicked out of his office? It is obvious enough to everybody that he is utterly incompetent, and that his accomplishments are better suited to running an ice-cream van.

      Disclaimer: I support his party at elections, in the absence of a more sane alternative.

  2. And I hereby request by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that the Australian Government and all the potential murderers and all the potential murder victims sit down and work out a solution to stop murder from ever taking place in Australia.

    1. Re:And I hereby request by davester666 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Isn't it more like, people are complaining about telephone-related fraud, so would the telephone company please listen to EVERY SINGLE phone conversation, and then report to the police all the calls that are fraud-related.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    2. Re:And I hereby request by psychodelicacy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the ISPs are the people who build and maintain the roads on which murderers travel to their victims' houses. Or maybe they're the people who sell cooking knives. Or maybe they're the people who provide alcohol to unstable people who then get mad and murder someone.

      Equally, you could say that the ISPs are like the owners of Xerox machines, which allow people to make unauthorised copies of copyrighted materials. Or maybe they're like libraries, which allow people to read copyrighted material for free.

      The point, I think, is that there is no good analogy for the roles of the parties in this kind of "crime" because it's the result of a pretty much unprecedented set of circumstances related to advances in technology.

      --
      A closed mouth gathers no foot.
  3. About Want... by flyneye · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's make grocers responsible for planet-wide obesity.
    Lets make foundrys responsible for gun related crime.
    Sounds like Australia has a silly tit in office.
    Like the old saying goes, and I believe it applies here in spite of its coarseness, "sh*t in one hand, and want in the other, then see which hand fills up first."

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  4. Not My Problem? by smd75 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What part of a court ordered "Not My Problem" does the AU politicians not understand about policing illegal downloads?

    I dunno, I think the ISPs could use this as leverage against the studios to really pay up. Almost to extortion, but legal.

    Want us to police your content, we dont, but if you offer good enough incentive, we might make an effort to work with you, but we dont really have to.

    --
    Im a troll because I disagree with you.
    1. Re:Not My Problem? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He who has the money makes the rules. And apparently that isn't the ISPs down there.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    2. Re:Not My Problem? by grimJester · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Politicians make the laws. They can't just shrug and say "The courts already decided the issue".

      That said, the ISPs have no incentive to spend money policing their customers. I don't think the studios are prepared to pay for any filtering either. Despite what they claim, they don't see piracy as a big enough money drain that spending loads of cash on ISP level policing would be worth it. Piracy is just an excuse to get tighter copyright laws.

  5. Only one way by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    TPM/DRM at the board level and require special clients ( like netzero ) to be inserted into your IP stack. You cant have ANY file that isn't approved by the 'key server'. Even your lowly diary has to be approved, let alone music, books, movies, games, applications. Connect online without your trusty TPM enabled client, you get reported.

    Great way to kill off free speech too, that old non DRM'd PDF of Mein Kampf you legally bought off Amazon years ago is no longer permitted, AND you get reported the next time you try to view it off your backup CDROM copy.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  6. Total Internet Criminality by loftwyr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not make the Internet itself illegal! Then they can slowly decriminalize individual ports and protocols with special identifications until they have complete control over everything.

    Once that's done, nothing illegal will happen and all their citizens will be happy drones.

  7. Re:Maybe it's time for real reform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seriously want to put people in jail for copyright infringement? So, someone downloads a 0.99$USD song illegally and you make a government waste thousands of dollars for this person?

    It would be less trouble and cost exponentially less for the copyright holder to ask the local government for the retail price of each illegally downloaded copyrighted material than to jail them.

    In other words, get real. Copyright infringement doesn't deserve jail nor does it deserve thousands and millions of dollars in damages.

    There's also the fact that some things aren't even sold in some markets. So yes there is copyright infringement but no actual loss of sales. So how can there be any monetary damages in these cases?

  8. Gah - somebody stop this ridiculous man by GrubLord · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not representational government when you blindly push your personal agenda against the objections of just about every stakeholder and expert in the system.

    I wish Steven Conroy would hurry up and get caught looking at naughty pics of Miranda Kerr on the (uncensored) Internet during a newscast and fired, so the free world can stop giggling at all these Australian human rights violations and we can all get back to being the relaxed outback heroes people used to think of us as.

    1. Re:Gah - somebody stop this ridiculous man by SQL+Error · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There will be an election before too long. DON'T VOTE LABOR.

      Vote Liberal/National, Democrat, Independent, hell, even Green (though they're still crazy as a bedbug). Just don't vote Labor.

  9. Why have talks when you won in court? by TechForensics · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why should the ISPs enter into talks when they've already won in court?

    --
    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
  10. Not even attempting to police its internet traffic by D4C5CE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...seems to be what saved this ISP in court.
    For reasons other than network integrity, any surveillance or manipulation of users' data, such as port-blocking, DNS (or simply ToS) censorship, [cough]Phorm[/cough] or Deep Packet Inspection in general lead down a road to perdition, as courts will show little mercy with defendants who through their own actions have themselves conceded (even though inaccurately, as there are still e.g. VPNs) the feasibility of the plaintiffs' outlandish demands.

  11. Re:Maybe it's time for real reform? by BakaHoushi · · Score: 4, Funny

    There's also the fact that some things aren't even sold in some markets. So yes there is copyright infringement but no actual loss of sales. So how can there be any monetary damages in these cases?

    I thought we were here to politely discuss copyrights, and then you go and bring logic and facts and fairness into this. Clearly you've never negotiated with **AA's before.

  12. Re:Not even attempting to police its internet traf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not true, they have a disconnect policy for people who have used their network outside the TOS and infringing copyright is certainly on that list.

    The problem is that they were never provided with a customer who had been found guilty of infringing copyright, only allegations that had not been proven in a court of law... so they did the only sensible thing, they forwarded the allegations of crime to the police and waited for the justice system to arrive at a verdict... none were forthcoming (AFAIK).

    The content owners are trying to bypass the judiciary, effectively being judge jury and executioner and on top of that want the ISPs to play gamekeeper for them too... what cheek.

  13. Don't you see?! by Dirtside · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hollywood just had its highest box office year EVER! Clearly piracy is taking a huge toll, and... ...uh... wait...

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  14. this is simple by Bobtree · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Technical approaches do not solve social problems.

    There is a trivial way to resolve illegal downloading.

    Legalize it.