Keen to hear from anyone that receives a copyright infringement notice

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Keen to hear from anyone that receives a copyright infringement notice

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 17

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#517376 6-Sep-2011 10:53

NonprayingMantis:
Presumably the larger ISPs will operate on some kind of credit though ’30 days’ or something.

Why would they? It's less work for them to demand immediate payment and simply throw away any not paid for by the following day, if not received with cheque attached. It's not like any of them WANT to be participating in the scheme. Cover your backside by complying with the letter of the law and no more, I would have thought.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#517378 6-Sep-2011 10:55

rossmnz: So in effect, ISP gets infringement notice and responds with request for local copyright holder info plus $25 processing fee.

What is the period of time that the copyright holder has to supply the above before the infringement is deemed to have "expired"?

Thought I read somewhere 28 days???

The rights owner has to lodge the notice within 21 days of the alleged offence occurring.

All the notices I have seen in the past do not comply with NZ Copyright Act so the ISP probably doesn't have to do anything with them.

If a rights owner lodges a notice that complies with the copyright act then the ISP (IPAP actually) has 7 days to process it. One of the requirements of the act is that the rights owner has to pay or agree to pay the fee.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#517379 6-Sep-2011 10:56

SaltyNZ:
NonprayingMantis:
Presumably the larger ISPs will operate on some kind of credit though ’30 days’ or something.

Why would they? It's less work for them to demand immediate payment and simply throw away any not paid for by the following day, if not received with cheque attached. It's not like any of them WANT to be participating in the scheme. Cover your backside by complying with the letter of the law and no more, I would have thought.

They would do it to show they are not just complying with the letter of the law but being a good corporate citizen and following the intent too.

It's even less work for them to just ignore the notice if it doesn't address the issue of payment.

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#517382 6-Sep-2011 11:02

graemeh:

They would do it to show they are not just complying with the letter of the law but being a good corporate citizen and following the intent too.

I *guess*... Colour me unconvinced. We don't hold Ford responsible for speeders. We don't hold Wiltshire responsible for stabbings. We don't hold BNZ responsible for embezzlement. I don't believe ISPs should be responsible for crimes committed using their services either.

It's even less work for them to just ignore the notice if it doesn't address the issue of payment.

Good point!

EDIT: Before anyone addresses my wording, yes, I know we're not holding ISPs responsible, but we are forcing them to become a private police force. We don't do that for any other category of offense, as far as I know, which was the point I was trying to make. :-)

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

rossmnz

507 posts

Ultimate Geek

#517386 6-Sep-2011 11:10

so the real nub of the point I am trying to raise is that unless the copyright holder provides their local details and the NZD $25 within 21 days of infringement the infringement cannot be issued with a "strike"?.

It would seem unlikely given the current form of infringement notices ie without local details/monies that this can happen within 21 days.

The force is strong with this one!

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#517408 6-Sep-2011 11:37

SaltyNZ:
graemeh:

They would do it to show they are not just complying with the letter of the law but being a good corporate citizen and following the intent too.

I *guess*... Colour me unconvinced. We don't hold Ford responsible for speeders. We don't hold Wiltshire responsible for stabbings. We don't hold BNZ responsible for embezzlement. I don't believe ISPs should be responsible for crimes committed using their services either.

It's even less work for them to just ignore the notice if it doesn't address the issue of payment.

Good point!

EDIT: Before anyone addresses my wording, yes, I know we're not holding ISPs responsible, but we are forcing them to become a private police force. We don't do that for any other category of offense, as far as I know, which was the point I was trying to make. :-)

BNZ paid out when Access Brokerage did some dodgy stuff so you didn't pick a very good example :)

I agree with you though.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#517409 6-Sep-2011 11:39

rossmnz: so the real nub of the point I am trying to raise is that unless the copyright holder provides their local details and the NZD $25 within 21 days of infringement the infringement cannot be issued with a "strike"?.

It would seem unlikely given the current form of infringement notices ie without local details/monies that this can happen within 21 days.

Well it's whatever fee the IPAP sets which can be up to $25 plus GST.

The notices the ISPs are receiving at the moment are probably just the bulk generated notices from overseas, it's only the NZ issued ones that will potentially result in a "strike".

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

rossmnz

507 posts

Ultimate Geek

#517413 6-Sep-2011 11:46

Will be very interesting going forward.

Wonder if the bulk notices will ever move into line with what NZ law requires.

Id doubt it.

Thus this law will essentially only protect NZ copyright that being infringed?

Id suggest a lot of the stuff is not even on the radar in terms of downloads.

Besides I think the kiwi made stuff would get paid for more regularly anyways!

The force is strong with this one!

Cymro

283 posts

Ultimate Geek

#517517 6-Sep-2011 14:00

rossmnz: Will be very interesting going forward.

Wonder if the bulk notices will ever move into line with what NZ law requires.

Id doubt it.

Thus this law will essentially only protect NZ copyright that being infringed?

Id suggest a lot of the stuff is not even on the radar in terms of downloads.

Besides I think the kiwi made stuff would get paid for more regularly anyways!

Not really, the big movie studio's and music labels will be represented in NZ by NZFACT and RIANZ, so they will send infringement notices to the IPAPs on behalf of Sony/MGM/Disney etc.

The bulk notices are in the crappy standard ACNS format, and without the added bells and whistles the NZ law allows for they can just be ignored (in fact the IPAPs don't even need to reply telling them that they don't conform...).

CM

141 posts

Master Geek

#517939 7-Sep-2011 09:31

Copyright law puts brakes on Internet traffic
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10749878&ref=facebookheadlines

"Telecom and Orcon said yesterday that they had not had any arrive"

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#517943 7-Sep-2011 09:33

Yeah, something similar happened in Sweden when their law came into force, if I remember rightly. It was pretty temporary.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

vexxxboy

4244 posts

Uber Geek

#517947 7-Sep-2011 09:37

CM: Copyright law puts brakes on Internet traffic
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10749878&ref=facebookheadlines

"Telecom and Orcon said yesterday that they had not had any arrive"

also remember that theres not a lot to download until the US TV season starts in a couple of weeks

Common sense is not as common as you think.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#517953 7-Sep-2011 09:42

vexxxboy:
CM: Copyright law puts brakes on Internet traffic
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10749878&ref=facebookheadlines

"Telecom and Orcon said yesterday that they had not had any arrive"

also remember that theres not a lot to download until the US TV season starts in a couple of weeks

Surely you jest.....
* Torchwood
* Dr Who
* Porn (there's always porn)

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#517962 7-Sep-2011 09:56

Regs:
defnz: Probably because they have to pay $25 per notice is why there haven't been any

so.... 100,000 punters download "mission improbable" from rox studios via bittorrent. rox now has a bill for $2.5M to send 1st strike notices out to all these punters. By the time they give the same 100,000 punters their 3rd strike notice for "mission improbably 3", rox has spent $7.5M. The punters lose their internets, what does rox studios get out of it?

Maybe a dose of commonsense around reasonable, global access? There's absolutely no excuse for not having it in this day and age!

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#517966 7-Sep-2011 10:02

graemeh:

Surely you jest.....
* Torchwood
* Dr Who
* Porn (there's always porn)

Oh crap, I'd forgotten they had started again in the US. Ah, well, not the porn obviously.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 17