Australian ISPs To Introduce '3-Strike' Style Anti-piracy Scheme

angry tapir writes Australian ISPs are considering a draft industry code, developed in response to government threats to step in and do it for them, that will implement a 'three notice' scheme for alleged copyright infringement. If an ISP customer gets three notices in 12 months, a rights holder can go to court to obtain their details and potentially take legal action against them. (The other part of the government's copyright crackdown is the introduction of a scheme to have pirate websites blocked — the government has yet to introduce the legislation for it, however.)

Comments

Still waiting

[mattventura]

Still waiting for the reverse three strikes, where an IP holder gets punished if they send 3 false notices.

Re:Still waiting

[Anonymous Coward]

If there is no punishment for false notices, send false notices about people who work with IP or ISPs. As well as politicians and their rich supporters. Problem solved.

Re:Still waiting

[Harlequin80]

No in this proposal it is even better! You have to PAY $25 in order to challenge a strike. So it is free to accuse but you have to pay for the right to challenge?!?!?! With a you get your money back if it was a wrong accusation. Bullshit

Re: Still waiting

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they have to pay to accuse you as well. As usual, the lawyers are the winners here

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

considering a draft industry code, developed in response to government threats to step in and do it for them

Last time I checked it WAS the govt's job to do law enforcement, not the ISPs.

Re:What?

[ZipK]

Last time I checked it WAS the govt's job to do law enforcement, not the ISPs.

This is part of the militarization of ISPs. You should be receiving an induction notice from your local ISP any day now.

Re:What?

[gronofer]

Last time I checked it WAS the govt's job to do law enforcement, not the ISPs.

Traditionally it was a civil matter, publisher vs publisher. The government only provided the courts.

We are all copyright holders

[bpkiwi]

Sooner or later people will work out that we are ALL copyright holders. For every photo you take, joke you write, or funny cat gif you edit, you hold the copyright. Go ahead, make some and send them to your representative's office, to their kids, or to their parents. All you have to do is wait for them to forward them on to someone else, and then use the laws and tools they are introducing against them. The law will become reasonable again pretty quickly I think.

Re:We are all copyright holders

[jonwil]

They will find a way to twist the law so that it only applies to the big corps and not the little guy.

Re:VPN's are about to be..

[Falos]

It's funny. My first thought was "Yep, gonna see more VPN sales." and then I realized, we already are. Consider the frequency of mentions, then of mentions of specific offers, then even the frequency of straight-up ads promising to solve spying.

It's no wonder there's so much effort in owning TOR nodes and branding it a pedorist tool. The number of people who use TOR has increased, yes, but more dramatic is the ballooning number of people aware (and interested). Say what you will about his patriotism (or lack) but Snowden got a lot of people covering up the red blinky weakspots they didn't know they had.

So when they lose 1/2 of their customer

[future assassin]

what are they going to do?

You call that a proxy server?

[Snufu]

THAT'S a proxy server

Re:Heh.

[Threni]

What "VPN industry"? To the extent it exists at all it's just tiny. And they're going to get legislated out of existence around the world in the next few years. No government - driven by the twin demands of the US government (ok, and their own security services) - and a reactionary, right wing media (following the rules of its wealthy, right wing proprieters, who've invested in and therefore benefit from large corporations who are all in bed with most western governments because they don't need to pay tax that way) - will allow people to communicate in private because "that's what terrorists do" (and people who want to challenge/change the above)

As an Australian rights holder, how do I opt-out?

[Sasayaki]

I'm an Australian author. I recently published my 10th novel. I make my living from selling books, primarily on Google Play, but also Amazon and Apple.

How do I opt out of this scheme? How do I request that even if someone downloads a copy of a book I normally request payment for without doing so, that they face no legal harm from anyone? The article mentions "rights holders" can get in contact with potential "infringers"; how would they notify me? I work from home, is my street address on file somewhere?

I found that when I ask these kinds of questions it leads to conclusions that should embarrass the people trying to implement them. The truth is; invariably, these kinds of schemes do absolutely nothing "for me" as downloads of my books would not even be detected by whatever system they want to put in place, even if I was stomping and shouting and demanding all the evil pirates ceased immediately.

This is, and always is, solely an effort to protect a foreign industry, Hollywood. An industry which gives the common Australian absolutely no consideration at all. Digital downloads are often more expensive here than the US, simply because "that's what the market will pay", which is code for, "Australia's high standard of living means we can gouge the shit out of them". Shows arrive late, miss our holidays, are screened out of order or are incomplete.

Why is this good for Australia and Australians in any way? If nothing else, and setting aside my own personal objections: why are we actively protecting a foreign industry and doing absolutely nothing to protect our domestic productions?