Slashdot Mirror
NZL Govt Rushes Thru Controversial Anti-Piracy Law
netsukeninja writes "The New Zealand government has surprised the public and even some MPs by moving to rush through its controversial 3 strikes-style legislation today. The new measures will allow for users to be disconnected from the Internet for up to 6 months, based on infringement claims from copyright holders."
Fuck them! I've been saying all along that they are no better than anybody else. This only proves it. They're actually worse because they are painting a very different picture of themselves as some kind of anti-authoritarian figures while exploiting public 'anger' (fomented in part by them) against the mainstream. There is more than one evil politician that started out by 'raging against the machine', but as soon as they get their power.. well, we all know the rest of that story. These are the types of political parties that will become your next NSDAP. Very dangerous.. Stay away from them. They are more toxic than Fukushima.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Remember how it was leaked that u.s. govt. bullied spain govt. to passing such a bill, and how it unanimously got rejected when bullying was leaked.
apparently, u.s. govt has not stopped being the whore of hollywood and record companies after that, and is working like a faithful dog since then.
Read radical news here
3 persons file copyright claims against the PM and then file for him to be taken off the internet.
"The new measures will allow for users to be disconnected from the Internet for up to 6 months, based on infringement claims from copyright holders."
It's official: big businesses rule the world.
The new measures will allow for users to be disconnected from the Internet for up to 6 months, based on infringement claims from copyright holders.
Just based on claims? Wow, that's guilty before proven innocent, no?
Burn it
Since when has New Zealand been abbreviated to "NZL"? It's just "NZ". Crazy Americans...
The new measures will allow for users to be disconnected from the Internet for up to 6 months, based on infringement claims from copyright holders.
Are these claims required to be made under oath? What processes are there in place to allow challenging such claims? After all, allowing restriction of perceived rights on the basis of random unchallengeable allegations by private organizations is just a way to allow corporate fascism.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
The heading is ONE sentence, do you really need to abbreviate everything? It's not like there's a hard limit on the length of a heading, is there? It looks like a 14-year old is trying to create a "hip" news feed but does so manually and needs to do everything as fast as possible.
If this happened to me, I'd start tunneling all my traffic through a VPS in Outer Elbonia while I look for a country to migrate to.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
This "three strikes and you're out" infantile framing of legislation drives me crazy. Since when have the laws of baseball (or any game) been considered a sensible foundation for a nation's legislation?
Seems to me too simplistic to base a country's law on sound bites like "three strikes and you're out".
Anyhow, if we're going for games-based legal systems, surely New Zealand should go for laws based on cricket (or rugby)? How about a financial services industry law based on LBW (leg before wicket)?
When is someone going to propose a 3 strikes law for government agencies (FBI, local police, state troopers, DEA, whatever)?
3 instances of violating citizens' constitutional rights or rights to privacy of electronic data (email), and they're disconnected from the Internet.
That should put the "3 strikes" nonsense into context.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Step 1 - Claim a copyright infringement on the music labels themselves.
Step 2 - Claim a copyright infringement on the MPs involved.
It's easy to claim an infringement. If you have a website and the IP address of these corporations have visited your website, they have a copy of the website in their cache.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
It's been nice knowing you guys. Write us some snail mail letters to let us know just how bad the RIAA/MPAA abuses of power are getting from time to time.
Since when have the laws of baseball (or any game) been considered a sensible foundation for a nation's legislation?
Not to mention that in baseball when the batter strikes the ball it's not a strike, a strike is when he misses. The correct grammar for that would be "three strikes and he is out", because it's the batter who goes out when the pitcher strikes the catcher's mitt with the ball.
Just based on claims? Wow, that's guilty before proven innocent, no?
Looks like you are under some kind of mistaken assumption that NZL is supposed to be some kind of democracy or something.
Despite appearances, it's actually a corporatocracy just like most other English-speaking countries these days.
Remember how it was leaked that u.s. govt. bullied spain govt. to passing such a bill, and how it unanimously got rejected when bullying was leaked.
I believe it was rejected because it's a totally unenforceable law.
How do you control who has access to the internet? Would you require ID for using a cyber cafe? How do you control that, put a police officer everywhere there is a public computer? How do you control WiFi networks? Make it a crime to have a weak password in your wireless router? What about dial-up? Require ID for everyone who makes an international call because there might be a modem at the other end?
These proposals are so fucking stupid that I wonder how come no one raises these points more often.
I claim Sony has infringed on my copyright not once, not twice, not thrice, but four times. Who do I complain to? Do they have an email address.
much of the terrifying horrific media.gov supplied focusonable imagery associated with the never ending holycost profitseize looks fulfilling (to fortune tellers) enough, to merit even more adulation/ducats, to our rulers & other oddly chosen earth based deities/minions? & this is only willful wednesday?
Why is it that whenever some large industry wants their way, governments everywhere suddenly gets the power to push legislation through in under a day with no debate, but when people genuinely want better drug laws, equal marriage statutes, civil rights legislation, public healthcare and so forth then suddenly governments need time to "weigh the issue thoroughly" and "engage in discussion with all sides" and ends up taking months, years or decades to make any headway whatsoever. Why does ANY government that purports to be a democracy (or a democratic republic) have any ability to "push through" any law that's not a declaration of war or public emergency? Guess the MAFIAA really does run the world.
I'll be honest, we're throwing science against the wall to see what sticks. -Cave Johnson
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's hard to see ISP's policing this at all.. even if there is a law to disconnect someone, they are basically going to either a). end to end encrypt their traffic or b) lose customers to competitor ISPs (if their exist)
You can't start calling the internet an essential service out of one side of your mouth and then deprive people of it over a civil complaint.
It's just that a lot of Internet users are far more familiar with alpha-2 than alpha-3. For example, country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) use alpha-2 with only one exception (.uk rather than .gb due to JANET NRS heritage).
It's not like there's a hard limit on the length of a heading, is there?
The SLASH software does indeed have such a limit.
You can also get a strike by hitting the ball out of play.
A foul ball does not give a third strike. (Ignore bunts for a moment.)
what about patent clams or stuff that is legal / free in NZ but not in other other places makes a clam?
what if it's over something there part of a right holder says it's ok but some other person makes a clam?
This "three strikes and you're out" infantile framing of legislation drives me crazy. Since when have the laws of baseball (or any game) been considered a sensible foundation for a nation's legislation?
When you get arrested and sent to jail for several years for shoplifting a VHS tape from a Wal-Mart because you already have two drug possession convictions on your file, you know something is wrong with the judiciary system.
Start filing copyright complaints against the content companies and consortia.
Of course, then they'll just push for new legislation exempting themselves from 3-strikes.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tzr5J39svg&feature=share
This is why we, the people, should DEMAND a weekly or monthly vote, on whatever the hell WE want. We should be voting for policies, not parties. The political parties just reneg on their promises as soon as they get into power, so in what way is that democracy?
This is just another classic example of the Jewish mafia who own your country, flexing their muscles.
What about corporations?
There are corporate companies such as those that use open source in violation of the license or data-harvesting companies that are likely to have three infringements an hour - are those companies subject to this law? Could Google, if it were found to have 3 violations, be knocked off the net for 6 months?
I'm very disappointed in this law, and ashamed to be kiwi. The three main things I'm against is: a) The law goes against a basic principle of our justice system which is "innocent until proven guilty" b) It was pushed through parliament by a process which circumvents most of our democratic protections c) It still doesn't deal with the fact that account holder != computer != person I was involved in the consultation for the first version of this law, and the process for the notices is a horrible convoluted pass-the-buck around ISPs due to the issues surrounding IP ownership vs the end relationship with the customer, which is further complicated due to our privacy laws. I've always said that the law was akin to charging the owner of a car with a hit-and-run when they weren't the driver. Shame on you NZ Parliament!
This is AWESOME.......
So we can just pick someone and constantly report them for copyright infringement and have their internet shut off......
Now does anyone have a list of the people that voted for this 'Magical' law???????
Surprisingly, no-one in the above comments seems to have pointed this out (Unless it's burried too deep for me to have noticed). Internet access isn't supplied per-person. It's per-household. That makes this essentially collective punishment: If one member of the household commits the offense, then they are all made to suffer.
People also seem to be excluding the fine that may accompany the legislation. But here are some other tid- bits. . All is not lost (yet).
I am amazed that this sort of thing will go through on an election year!
from:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10719201
While the ability for copyright holders to apply to have repeat offenders disconnected remains in the legislation, it will not come into effect unless after two years it is shown that other less severe sanctions are ineffective.
Those sanctions include warning notices from ISPs to their customers informing them they have infringed copyright, and an extension of the Copyright Tribunal's jurisdiction to provide a fast-track, low-cost process to hear illegal file sharing claims.
The tribunal will also be able to award penalties of up to $15,000 based on damages sustained by the copyright owner.
. .
bah bah black sheep what a waste of frikken time
He happens to be the MP for my electorate, too...never been too happy with the bloke but this takes the cake.
To the Hon. Simon Power -
I am appalled at the decision to pass the Copyright Amendment Act under urgency this week, and even more so at the retention of the account termination provision which has been left in the bill. Your championing of this measure shows a callous disregard for due process at the individual level and for democratic process at the parliamentary level. The errors committed in passing this legislation, which amounts to a 20th-century solution for a 19th-century business model faced with a 21st-century problem, are grave and will be difficult to undo.
Points which need to be understood in this matter are as follows:
1) Copyright infringement is a civil matter. By placing ordinary citizens under threat of onerous and disproportionate consequences for alleged offences, this legislation criminalises an action which should rather be resolved in civil proceedings and places ISPs and Crown authority in the position of acting as enforcers for large media and publishing interests. I need not remind you that these interests are nearly all overseas, so in essence you are ceding another piece of New Zealand sovereignty at the behest of international lobbyists.
2) Internet access is ubiquitous enough to be considered a utility. Most households rely on their internet connectivity for at least some portion of their daily communications, including email, voice and access to work, school, commercial and public services. If you would have us believe that there is logical justification for termination of internet connectivity as a consequence of infringement, then you need to be able to make a similar case for cutting off someone's water, phone, power and post, as any of these could further someone's ability to break the law.
3) The move to pass the bill under urgency is cynical and undemocratic. The far-reaching implications of a law which could quite conceivably deprive New Zealanders of their ability to communicate via commonplace and ordinary means in the face of allegations by foreign content providers require a full public airing and transparency. Sneaking it in amongst the firewood signals your unwillingness to have an honest debate about what is actually at stake here and shows once again how this Government uses parliamentary process to act in a unitary fashion. The cover provided by the ongoing Canterbury putsch is only too convenient.
I reside in the Rangitikei electorate and have never felt so inadequately represented (or so ably misrepresented). Please, Mr Power, leave the Government now before you do any further damage to our country.
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
One of the many daft aspects of this law, but one not well covered already, is that it's based on the faulty assumption that the piracy is occurring over the internet.
Speaking as a New Zealander myself, there's an economic barrier to piracy in that internet access here is slow and expensive. I have a pretty good plan at 40GB/month at $80 plus $3/GB for excess usage. Aside from recent and obscure stuff, it's generally cheaper and more convenient (not to mention legal) to hire from the local video library.
I'll hazard a guess that a large proportion of file sharing in NZ happens off-the-radar with people passing portable HDDs around. No less so with this new law in place. But that's already covered by existing laws, and that's as much as the government can do since it's impractical to enforce.
And another thing - this law apparently deals with downloaders as copyright infringers, rather than the party they're downloading from. Without being clued up on copyright law, this strikes me as utterly nonsensical. Downloading is *not* an act of copying. How exactly do you copy something you don't already have possession of? If I buy a pirated book (knowingly or otherwise), have I infringed copyright?
Now they only need to make one law that obliges me to buy their shit! It's the only way they will ever see the color my money.
...except when nobody understands the analogy! Speaking as a Brit, only by posting my comment have I discovered through feedback that a strike in baseball is when the batsman (or whatever he is called in that game) misses the ball. Weird, new knowledge to me anyway. I'd assumed a strike had something to do with the striking (hitting) of the ball. My ignorance.
So I think you got to pick an analogy that the local public get. Not sure how big a game baseball is in NZ, hence my cheeky suggestion they should go for cricket or rugby analogies instead... Certainly in the UK baseball is very much a minority sport, nobody really plays it, nobody learns it at school. If you go for baseball analogies here people will look at you blankly. The only reason people buy baseball bats here is because they want to hit somebody, if you were walking down the street with one the chances are the police might pull over and have a friendly chat with you to check you're not up to no good (while they wouldn't look twice if you were walking down the street with a cricket bat under your arm).
In theory, it's somewhat of a decent idea..I would say that you need an investigation to do anything (which will never happen, let's be reasonable). First and second strikes are a warning letter, third strike is 6-month disconnection (from that ISP). Hell, maybe even blacklisting your ISP after your fifth or sixth.
The problem in general with these laws is that there's probably not going to be any actual investigation, which is how it really screws everyone. I don't think they're necessarily a "Whoa, whoa, let's not go this far" thing, so much as just needing a lot more moderation and informed argument.
Everyone in New Zealand all pirate, every internet customer pirates movies/mp3s and really blatantly too. Everyone gets their internet shut off for 6 months ISP goes out of business and bankrupts due to lack of subscribers :)