Slashdot Mirror
Australian Government Moving Forward With Anti-Piracy Mandate For ISPs
angry tapir (1463043) writes Australia is moving closer to a regime under which ISPs will be forced to block access to websites whose "dominant purpose" is to facilitate copyright violations. A secret government discussion paper (PDF) has been leaked and proposes a system of website blocking and expanded liability for ISPs when it comes to "reasonable steps that can be taken ... to discourage or reduce online copyright infringement."
Good thing the government took their guns away first.
Ah, but you forget. Tony Abbott doesn't learn. He's an insane corrupt sociopathic fucker that Australians have made a horrible horrible mistake by electing.
Captcha: snuffer
Uncle Rupert owns the content. Uncle Rupert owns our pay tv network. Uncle Rupert discourages FTTH.
Follow the money.
Spineless citizenry deserves an oppressive government.
Well, then most of my fellow citizens in the US definitely deserve the oppressive government we have. But what about the ones who are actually trying to change things? The problem is, you often get stuck with the government that other people deserve.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Ah, but you forget. Tony Abbott doesn't learn. He's an insane corrupt sociopathic fucker that Australians have made a horrible horrible mistake by electing.
Captcha: snuffer
Tony Abbot is a wonderful man. I love him. Stop saying such terrible things about him!
Good thing the government took their guns away first
Like all the gun-totin' cowboys in the US of A have made a difference.
Your corporates have stolen your economic future and sold it to themselves, your governement is all over you like a rash, your brothers, sisters, sons and daughters are sent to fake wars just to siphon a few trillion taxpayer dollars to corrupt military contractors, Every so-called security agency spies and blackmails you NSA, FBI, TSA, Police, Whatever, they're all out of your control. Lobbyists buy politicians to bring in SOPA/CISPA or whatever you're calling it this month etc etc,..
Thing is, all you chubby gun nuts spouting the second amendment and claiming you needed automatic weapons to protect yourselves from government abuses have just proved you're all intestine and no fortitude.
Weak.
How will it work? A national block on a huge set of p2p index sites? A national block on a huge set of download link index sites?
What more can an isp be commanded do? Deep packet inspection for rar files as downloaded?
The long term logging of all users by isp to be automatically cross referenced with p2p tracking industry groups?
Issue a decree that Australian banks and related credit card products are not to pay for VPN or other encrypted services that hide users from their Australian isp?
Then have laws ready to send end users identified by the tame isp after the 2nd letter for state-mandated copyright awareness counseling?
A ban on the internet for users caught again? Or users kept away from the internet for a few months or years?
After all that hard legal work why not just allow other US or UK streaming media services into Australia? Let Australians buy access to any US or UK show, movie as in US or UK? Let them pay per show or per season from any US media provider they like.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I thought ASIO malware was only going to be reserved for the "suspected terrorists and other security interests" and only "...used in extremely limited circumstances and only when explicitly approved by the Attorney-General through a warrant."
One Australia wide warrant for all p2p users then?
Be fun to see how the mass use of state sanction zero day malware interacts with average consumer grade heuristic analysis in your average consumer antivirus program?
Will all the AV brands selling in Australia be expected to whitelist for ASIO?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
What he tried to explain, and allow me to drive it home bluntly so it gets through some thick skulls: A right is pointless if you neither exercise it nor defend it. A right is never self serving. And whether you have it or not is not even being tested until you try to exercise it.
Essentially you can have any right, as long as you don't test it, you don't even know whether you'll really have it or not. Take the 3rd. Yes, the 3rd amendment. You know, the one where you needn't house soldiers. It's a bit silly today, ain't it? I mean, let's be reasonable here, if the country can't house its soldiers anymore... but let's take it as an example since it's one of the amendment nobody really gives a shit about anymore. As much as the Quartering Act (where the Brits forced the colonies to house soldiers whenever they pleased) was one of the reasons for the rebellion, there really is not any use for that particular amendment anymore.
But do you know whether it really applies? Or are there just no soldiers kicking you out of their bed and proclaiming it theirs 'cause the state currently has enough barracks? Sure, it's not the best example considering how easily the state could avoid infringing in this constitutional law, all it takes is build some kind of shelter for its soldiers.
But let's take a step back and look at the second. Do you have it? Or do you have it as long as you're not really a nuisance, much akin to the first where you're allowed to practice your free speech today mostly where you cannot be heard? The funny (or not so funny) thing is that the first WAS tested. And now we have "free speech zones".
I guess should anyone ever test the second, we'll get "free shooting zones".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
We learned that it's pointless to protest peacefully.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Correct, incorrect... language changes. Better to reclaim the word as a symbol of pride, as The Pirate Bay does.
I've given up most hope of ever reclaiming 'hacker' now, though.
A right would be pointless if there were never an occasion to use it. So far the existence of the right has made an environment where its exercise has not yet been necessary.It serves the people well.
The 3rd is reflective of the times during the Revolutionary War in which the Kings troops were billeted in houses of common people who were forced to feed and shelter their oppressors. This of course will also apply to domestic troops, police, NSA, or anyone in government. It was a concern once, who is to say it couldn't be in the future as well. Like I say, the right creates an environment.
I personally like living in a place where I can say what I choose, right or wrong, to anyone, anytime without fear of repercussions based on their office, class, religion, ethnicity and if there is; I can sue the pants off them in court and make a public spectacle of them. I notice this right gets plenty of exercise.
Open carry of weapons has always been around, but seldom used. Rural places have farmers that will carry a pistol on their hip, now and then,(like an old uncle or two of mine, and my grandfather as well) to ward off rattlesnakes, skunks, badgers or the neighbors illegal Mexican farmhands burgling outbuildings, neighbors dog raiding the chickenhouse,( all of which actually occurred) etc. I can recall seeing one walk into the bank to do business, without raising anyones eyebrows, with a revolver on his hip. Today, with concealed carry and the training that accompanies it, I hear many MORE tales of those defending their selves, family and property, successfully. Occasionally I will hear of misadventures, but then, if you license a nation to drive, you will occasionally have collisions, so what?
If you actually use logic on the situation, the nuts are those who would deny people the right to defend themselves and their families. There is NO defense for this stance that doesn't arise from selfish fear placed in their heads by the ignorant. The state is incapable of providing police protection around the clock to everyone. Notice the police show up AFTER a crime has been commited, not before. Guns are an important part of a life in pursuit of happiness like a set of wrenches is an important part of doing maintenance on your car. Further, the intention of the right exists, should the people ever need to take back control of their Constitutional government, no matter what government licensed lawyers my lie about. THAT, is the reason the issue gets ANY attention at all in D.C.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
http://mobile.philly.com/news/...
Here ya go. Happened a couple days ago. Patiant came into a hospital and started shooting. It was a gun-free zone but one of the doctors had his gun anyway and killed the guy.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki...
And also there you go. A group of people stood up against a branch of the federal government for something they believe in. No shots were fired, but they were prepared to. The BLM backed off.
Obviously these aren't the only ones. But they should satisfy your criteria.
A right would be pointless if there were never an occasion to use it. So far the existence of the right has made an environment where its exercise has not yet been necessary.It serves the people well.
Sounds like someone sold you a rock that keeps bears away, and consequently you are sure that there can be no bears regardless of people pointing out bears on the street, in your garden, rifling through your trash.
I personally like living in a place where I can say what I choose, right or wrong, to anyone, anytime without fear of repercussions based on their office, class, religion, ethnicity and if there is; I can sue the pants off them in court and make a public spectacle of them. I notice this right gets plenty of exercise.
You can't say what you like, to anyone at anytime. You probably never had that right, you certainly don't now. You just choose a subset of topics to discuss, to a subset of people, in a subset of times and places. Your own personal 'Free Speech Zone'. You are deluding yourself. Wake Up!
And lastly can I just point out how useless your firearm is for defending your rights: If you point your firearm at an official or member of law enforcement, you will be arrested and thrown into prison. Most likely, you will go to prison for longer that *I* would, were I to do the same thing in Australia, because despite other insanities, our sentencing laws are sane and our judicial system relatively free from corruption, whereas yours is utterly insane and utterly corrupt, and if you go to prison in the US you will stay there, stuck in the system for the rest of your life. So - what's the use of your firearm? Who are you going to point it at - tyrannical rabbits?
The NSA spends a lot of time and money "Defending America" by spying on everyone. But if the Copyright cartels drive everyone to use VPN's and crypto it will directly undermine all that hard work and money spent. As a matter of national security, the government of the USA needs to block the copyright enforcers from this path.
The US has its own plans http://judiciary.house.gov/ind... (Jul 24 2014)
Read what the US gov could do in the first 10 page pdf:
"amend the law to create a felony penalty for unauthorized Internet streaming. Specifically, we recommend the creation of legislation to establish a felony charge for infringement through unauthorised public performances conducted for commercial advantage or private financial gain,”"
and for the international friends:
"diplomatic and trade-based pressure"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Yes, the proof is in the pudding, the "land of the free" has the highest incarceration rates in the world, roughly 7X the rate of countries like China, Europe, and Australia. They are even more enthusiastic about locking up their own people than Saudi Arabia and Sudan.
As for TFA, most people outside Australia and many inside of it do not understand why this is a perennial issue in parliament. Neither side are serious about these things, they use the issue purely for political gain in the senate.
Aussie governments on both sides have argued both for and against this type of legislation since video cassettes became popular in the 80's. Malcolm Turnbull is not personally in favour of this legislation and Brandis just made a huge "free speech" fuss about changing the racial discrimination act to give people the right to be a bigot (specifically because his own media attack dog was found guilty under the act). However their personal stance is largely irrelevant since I'll bet that there is a minority "balance of power" senator that wants this, my guess is Bob Day from "family first". They were the ones who pushed this issue under the Labour gov, then spat the dummy when their own anti-abortion web sites started appearing on the "leaked" blacklist.
Both sides of government have used this issue as bait for independent senators, they promise to implement if the senator cooperates on other matters, knowing full well the majority of parliamentarians won't accept it when, or rather if, it comes to a vote. They get the senate vote(s) early in their term, then they have endless inquires about how to implement "stupid idea X", people get stirred up, enquires come back with mixed results, the issue goes quiet before the next election. Independent senator loses seat he was luck to win in the first place and is replaced by a new independent from a different electorate with similar ideas and no experience bargaining with a major political party.
In other words unless the pure political cynicism in keeping the status-quo concerns you, then this is a non-story.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Last time, the then Labor government insisted that the two biggest ISPs put blocks in place, even though the legislation didn't get through the parliament.
The end result: amongst others, a school tuck-shop (canteen) got blocked. Those nefarious parents were maliciously placing orders for kids lunches online!
And, less than a day after it started, school kids could tell you how to bypass the blocks.
I've never pirated a movie, for the lack of bandwidth, and the lack of desire. I've never pirated music ... much the same reasons.
I've got a 30GB a month ADSL2+ connection, and better things to do with it.
But I resent the huge amount of bullshit that governments and movie and music companies put out about piracy, to the point where I won't even buy discs of either until they fall off the "peak interest" of being the latest thing out. When it's cheap, I'll think about buying it.
A lot of the time I won't buy it even then as a direct result of the crap that they all spout.
Don't blame me, it's usually 2 in the morning when I post
Australia is obliged under its free trade agreements with the United States, Singapore and Korea (not yet ratified) to provide a legal incentive to ISPs to cooperate with rights holders to prevent infringement on their systems and networks.
And, ladies and gentlement, there you have it. Again. Completely bypassing the democratic process, FTA's trump national legislation. And anyone that thinks that Singapore and Korea are actually the ones pressing Australia to ramp up their pro-copyright industry efforts is naive. It's just a little smokescreen. So Who's Your Daddy?!! Good ole Uncle Sam (MPAA/RIAA/USTR) is. Bend over, and take it like a man Aussies!
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.