Should I join the Pirate Party of New Zealand?

Forums › Off topic › Should I join the Pirate Party of New Zealand?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

17 posts

Geek

#462779 26-Apr-2011 21:58

Beccara: Whats the difference between your car being snapped by a speed camera and a ticket being sent out to you and your internet connection being snapped by **AA and a notice being sent out to you.

There are differences in (1) the amount of the fine, (2) the other consequences (loss of internet), (3) the accuser (a govt maintained speed camera vs big overseas corporations) (4) evidence (with the speed camera a photo of the car and driver is taken and required for enforcement, as well as laws being in place for the regular testing and maintenance of the camera), and yes, presumption of guilt. In the case of the filesharing accusation you are presumed guilty and have to prove your innocence to the copyright tribunal, in the case of the speed camera you are presumed innocent and some evidence has to be shown against you (the evidence produced by the camera itself).

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462781 26-Apr-2011 22:01

[Whats the difference between your car being snapped by a speed camera...}

Nothing, you are correct.

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#462789 26-Apr-2011 22:07

There is evidence, Speed Camera = Photo, Copyright = uTorrent screenshot.

1 is moot, 2 is fair, download enough = no net, speed enough = no drivers license. 3 is fine, it's a civil matter but the volume would overwhelm even the most well funded court.

ISP's have the right to claim costs which is still up in the air as to how much as I understand it, slapping a $50 charge per notice to the **AA is going to deter the shotgun approach and any ISP worth it's salt is going to have traffic flow history to match the source and dst IP's.

Something had to be done, The content owners have a right to pursue infringement and anyone saying this should be done via the local court is dreaming, the volume of notices would break the courts system, You get a notice and can either accept it or fight it if you think it's wrong. Just because you can't get your favourite TV show here because the networks wont buy it doesn't give anyone a free pass to download

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462796 26-Apr-2011 22:17

(1) the amount of the fine Irelevant. All laws have penalties. Or do you prefer the $250000 that you see on a DVD when you play it? In reality it will probably be a small out of court settlement as is the case overseas.

(2) the other consequences (loss of internet) Drink drivers lose their licence, similar here.

, (3) the accuser (a govt maintained speed camera vs big overseas corporations)

True, altho the organisations also represent the creators of the media you enjoy. However, the Govt has passed the Act so therfore that nullifues your point 3.

(4) evidence (with the speed camera a photo of the car and driver is taken and required for enforcement, as well as laws being in place for the regular testing and maintenance of the camera)

Good points, I agree. If a rightsholder accuses, there will be evidence, as the Act states. We will have to wait and see how accurate it is. I expect a timestamped document stating the media, date, time, IP address. The IP address will be linkable to the NZ account holder.

5. , and yes, presumption of guilt. In the case of the filesharing accusation you are presumed guilty and have to prove your innocence to the copyright tribunal, in the case of the speed camera you are presumed innocent and some evidence has to be shown against you (the evidence produced by the camera itself).

Incorrect. When you get the ticket, you have already been caught, accused, deemed as guilty, hence you also get the bill in the mail (fine)

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462801 26-Apr-2011 22:32

What would be a better trend for this long thread, is not discussing why downloading copyright material should be allowed, but talking over the issues that we would hope will take place when all of this becomes a reality, i.e. after 1 September. Such issues as what form the rightsholders evidence will take, how much will evolve over actions, where wifis get used, parents get accused etc. Despite what the negative posters say, I believe common sense will prevail, and that may amount to amendments, or by a more sensible approach to some legal actions. Awareness will occur. The intent is not to cancel massive internet connections, or rake in millions in revenue, it is to help curb illegal downloading of copyright content.

Ragnor

8219 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#462807 26-Apr-2011 23:12

The result will be exactly the same as in every other country that has passed a 3 strikes type law so far.

The media industry will contract out the tracking and filing of infringement notices to 3rd party firms who specialise in it. There will be a perverse incentive (due to the lack of fine/punishment/fee for invalid and wrong notices) to create as many notices as possible, usually this results if lots of invalid and fake notices which waste everyone's time and money.

A few people will get busted, probably grandma's and average joes who have no clue how this internet really thing works. They will feature in some stuff and nzherald articles and probably get some air time on Cambell Live and Closeup.

A few people will be scared off p2p/torrents, everyone else will keep doing it.

Nothing will really change until the media industry finally concedes their old business model is obsolete and does not work in the digital/internet age anymore.

Eventually hopefully they will come out with a decent service similar to iTunes (Music) or Steam (PC Gaming) for TV and Movies that acknowledges that digital goods have infinite supply and practically zero marginal cost and that they need to leverage's longtail economic theory and other forms of scarcity to make money.

Good times.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462857 27-Apr-2011 08:24

Agreed. I think they will be mindful of the grandmas etc, and ill informed parents, and try to make early publicised examples, that will appear in the media. The result will be to stop the majority of downloaders, that is the non geek population. I doubt they will fine $15000 at least to start with. More like $2500 which was a typical out of court settlement in the US. That is affordable and a penalty for most of us. By affordable (before I get a barrage!) if a person can afford a PC, a broadband connection of probably high Gb, they can afford a $2500 fine, payable over a year.

And the rightsholders do need to make purchasing content like iTunes. Available at low cost, and an extreme variety. Internet TV needs to become a ready and common option. That will also have an indirect effect on p2p especially if ISP's can be providing zero rating on online content that can be hosted in NZ. ISP's would benefit due to lower international traffic, faster speeds due to this new content being local.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462858 27-Apr-2011 08:25

When I mentioned "like iTunes" I am referring to music, movies, TV, etc

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#462870 27-Apr-2011 08:48

tdgeek:
(3) the accuser (a govt maintained speed camera vs big overseas corporations)

True, altho the organisations also represent the creators of the media you enjoy. However, the Govt has passed the Act so therfore that nullifues your point 3.

i read this probably more than 10 times. how can his point is 'nullified' just because the govt passed the act?*facepalm*

i believe he has relevant point. government represent the people. big overseas corporations represent hollywood / media businesses. their main aim is to make money. since when kiwis vote for **AA to watch their back?

gzt

17111 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#462917 27-Apr-2011 10:25

tdgeek: And the rightsholders do need to make purchasing content like iTunes. Available at low cost, and an extreme variety. Internet TV needs to become a ready and common option. That will also have an indirect effect on p2p especially if ISP's can be providing zero rating on online content that can be hosted in NZ. ISP's would benefit due to lower international traffic, faster speeds due to this new content being local.

Good to see tdgeek recognising this part of the problem. Everyone wins if content is actually available for online purchase and online rental. This will vastly reduce the problem, and vastly increase the market for content.

I hope tdgeek can also recognise the need for traditional sharing - the practice of lending a movie or cd to a friend. After years of industry failure, iTunes was a big success because it simply made content available. It can be an even bigger success if it implements traditional sharing. This will only attract more people to the legitimate market.

pajamian

17 posts

Geek

#462980 27-Apr-2011 12:25

gzt:
tdgeek: And the rightsholders do need to make purchasing content like iTunes. Available at low cost, and an extreme variety. Internet TV needs to become a ready and common option. That will also have an indirect effect on p2p especially if ISP's can be providing zero rating on online content that can be hosted in NZ. ISP's would benefit due to lower international traffic, faster speeds due to this new content being local.

Good to see tdgeek recognising this part of the problem. Everyone wins if content is actually available for online purchase and online rental. This will vastly reduce the problem, and vastly increase the market for content.

I hope tdgeek can also recognise the need for traditional sharing - the practice of lending a movie or cd to a friend. After years of industry failure, iTunes was a big success because it simply made content available. It can be an even bigger success if it implements traditional sharing. This will only attract more people to the legitimate market.

Took the words right out of my mouth, although I'd like to know what your idea is for legitimate traditional sharing?

Ragnor

8219 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#462988 27-Apr-2011 12:51

Rick Shea covers some the the issues on his blog:

French copyright holders are sending 50,000 notices per day. What does that mean for us?
http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/french-copyright-holders-are-sending-50000-no

US wants to take an axe to New Zealand IP law (updated)
http://lawgeeknz.posterous.com/us-wants-to-take-an-axe-to-new-zealand-ip-law

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#463004 27-Apr-2011 13:21

Isn't there a ISP charge to the copyright holder for handling notices? @ $50 per notice we're talking about $170k per day

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79263 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#463009 27-Apr-2011 13:34

gzt:
tdgeek: And the rightsholders do need to make purchasing content like iTunes. Available at low cost, and an extreme variety. Internet TV needs to become a ready and common option. That will also have an indirect effect on p2p especially if ISP's can be providing zero rating on online content that can be hosted in NZ. ISP's would benefit due to lower international traffic, faster speeds due to this new content being local.

Good to see tdgeek recognising this part of the problem. Everyone wins if content is actually available for online purchase and online rental. This will vastly reduce the problem, and vastly increase the market for content.

I hope tdgeek can also recognise the need for traditional sharing - the practice of lending a movie or cd to a friend. After years of industry failure, iTunes was a big success because it simply made content available. It can be an even bigger success if it implements traditional sharing. This will only attract more people to the legitimate market.

And that's the answer to piracy: make content available, quickly, to people interested that can download. Others might want to watch on TV, and a few might een continue to download content outside the legal framework.

But creating a false scarcity of the products and then trying to stop people sharing... That's plain stupidity. It's bits, there's no scarcity of those around...

Ragnor

8219 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#463013 27-Apr-2011 13:43

freitasm:

But creating a false scarcity of the products and then trying to stop people sharing... That's plain stupidity. It's bits, there's no scarcity of those around...

Russia has been cited in the past as a country that has been a hotbed of PC game piracy. However Newell said that Steam, plus localizing the game for Russia and shipping it at the same time as the English language versions, has made that country one of Valve's biggest markets for its games in Europe. Newell states, " .. this market that you shouldn't waste your time on, that went from, 'You shouldn't waste our time on it, they'll just pirate it,' to 'it's actually a really large market for us now,' once you actually do the things that allow your product to be played."

- Gabe Newell (Steam/Valve Software)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6