Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
2703 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 688


  Reply # 1170541 7-Nov-2014 09:52
Send private message

It will be interesting to see what happens, Obviously the isp's are going to say they only offer a service to be able to get Netflix, what you watch on it is not their problem, and they cant police it. Which is the same sort of . argument that streaming sites use, ie: we only provide links to the videos , we dont host them . It doesnt work as most of them have been closed down and fined heavily.  I can see the censors point , it is against the law to watch these movies in NZ and the only people they can go after are the isp's who let you do it . will be interesting to what happens, as people have mentioned it opens a huge can of worms if they are successful.




Common sense is not as common as you think.


453 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 226


  Reply # 1170623 7-Nov-2014 11:09
One person supports this post
Send private message

vexxxboy: I can see the censors point , it is against the law to watch these movies in NZ and the only people they can go after are the isp's who let you do it


Is it really 'against the law'?

If I want to watch Sons of Anarchy, I can order the boxed Blu-Ray set from Amazon and get it shipped to NZ, legally.

But I can also watch it on Netflix, 'illegally'

Whats the difference?

2721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537


  Reply # 1170624 7-Nov-2014 11:09
Send private message

To be honest I cant see that there is a huge 'censorship violation' risk with the geo-unblockers in use at the moment.
The services that people now have access to are bound by local ratings etc.
The unblockers are also relatively confined in what they make available - e.g. Netflix, BBC etc.
Not exactly dodgy suppliers I wouldnt have thought.





Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

Glurp
8268 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3797

Subscriber

  Reply # 1170626 7-Nov-2014 11:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

Obviously this country didn't learn anything from the idiotic crusade of British bluestockings against Lady Chatterley's Lover. Censorship is ridiculous and always has been. It is also unenforceable. I use Tor for most of my browsing because it is nobody's business what I look at. Combine that with an overseas proxy and you can go anywhere, do anything. Of course with power comes responsibility. I do believe in self-censorship. I have no interest in seeing people being demeaned or beheaded. But it is my choice to make. And I will download anything I please. I don't need some state nanny telling me what I am allowed to look at.




I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


2703 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 688


  Reply # 1170645 7-Nov-2014 11:22
Send private message

MileHighKiwi:
vexxxboy: I can see the censors point , it is against the law to watch these movies in NZ and the only people they can go after are the isp's who let you do it


Is it really 'against the law'?

If I want to watch Sons of Anarchy, I can order the boxed Blu-Ray set from Amazon and get it shipped to NZ, legally.

But I can also watch it on Netflix, 'illegally'

Whats the difference?


it is , if they ban a film it covers watching it , owning it, downloading and streaming it




Common sense is not as common as you think.


2721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537


  Reply # 1170646 7-Nov-2014 11:23
Send private message

My point was the ISPs are (potentially) only unblocking already regulated and censorship compliant sites anyway.
At most something might be rated a year or 2 different to NZ - in whose favour I couldnt say - but compared to the freely available 'nasty' stuff on the internet its trivial.




Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571


  Reply # 1170697 7-Nov-2014 12:08
Send private message

MileHighKiwi:
vexxxboy: I can see the censors point , it is against the law to watch these movies in NZ and the only people they can go after are the isp's who let you do it


Is it really 'against the law'?

If I want to watch Sons of Anarchy, I can order the boxed Blu-Ray set from Amazon and get it shipped to NZ, legally.

But I can also watch it on Netflix, 'illegally'

Whats the difference?


sons of anarchy is not in question here.  It has been shown on NZ TV so clearly has passed muster with the censor.

What is in question is the content that the censor has not approved. (the example in the article was Human Centipede 2: full sequence)

 


What happens if you order, from overseas, content that the censor has deemed objectionable?   If customs pick it up, would they confiscate it or just let it through? (This is separate to the issue of whether they would pick it up or not)

The argument Slingshot etc are making is that global mode falls under parallel importing type laws. 
Are parallel importers allowed to import and sell material that the censor has not rated?

Or lets say you go over to Thailand and buy a bunch of content the censors deem objectionable (snuff movie, animal porn).  If customs look in your bag on the way here, would they confiscate it?  Or would they let it through under 'parallell importing' laws?

If it was totally cut and dried the censor wouldn't be wasting their time on this. So clearly there is some sort of grey area here

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 26

Trusted

  Reply # 1170712 7-Nov-2014 12:25
2 people support this post
Send private message

I don't believe in censorship at all its just the government attempting to control our general lives again.

The whole censorship thing with the internet is a funny one for example Human Centipede is banned in NZ however you can still watch the trailer on the youtube witch basically tells you the base story line, why are they not going after youtube? well its simple they are too big to go after to control however Slingshot/Orcon are much smaller and easy to bully.

I don't use Slingshot global mode even though my provider is slingshot, I use other providers that allow the same thing and I use my friends Netflix account who lives in the US.




---------------------------------------------------------------
Nebukadnessar


706 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 206


  Reply # 1170759 7-Nov-2014 12:44
Send private message

NonprayingMantis:
MileHighKiwi:
vexxxboy: I can see the censors point , it is against the law to watch these movies in NZ and the only people they can go after are the isp's who let you do it


Is it really 'against the law'?

If I want to watch Sons of Anarchy, I can order the boxed Blu-Ray set from Amazon and get it shipped to NZ, legally.

But I can also watch it on Netflix, 'illegally'

Whats the difference?


sons of anarchy is not in question here.  It has been shown on NZ TV so clearly has passed muster with the censor.

What is in question is the content that the censor has not approved. (the example in the article was Human Centipede 2: full sequence)
What happens if you order, from overseas, content that the censor has deemed objectionable?   If customs pick it up, would they confiscate it or just let it through? (This is separate to the issue of whether they would pick it up or not)

The argument Slingshot etc are making is that global mode falls under parallel importing type laws. 
Are parallel importers allowed to import and sell material that the censor has not rated?

Or lets say you go over to Thailand and buy a bunch of content the censors deem objectionable (snuff movie, animal porn).  If customs look in your bag on the way here, would they confiscate it?  Or would they let it through under 'parallell importing' laws?

If it was totally cut and dried the censor wouldn't be wasting their time on this. So clearly there is some sort of grey area here


But if you tried to bring back objectionable content and it was confiscated by Customs (as it should be), would customs then try and also prosecute / fine the airline for carrying the item into the country?

Obviously not, the airline can't possibly know what content you are bringing in "undeclared" in your luggage, just as slingshot / orcon / VPN providers etc can't possibly know what you are bringing in through the network.

Its all so new and technology changing too rapidly for laws to keep up.


1374 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215


  Reply # 1170886 7-Nov-2014 14:26
Send private message

Most porn sites are happy to take peoples money, and don't care what country you're in.

You can access this from ANY ISP. What's the censors office got to say about this!

Proscute every ISP as it hasn't been through NZ censorship and they're allowing access?

296 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted

  Reply # 1170890 7-Nov-2014 14:32
Send private message

Might as well take on NZ post and say they are guilty of allowing  their postal system to be used to deliver  banned movies/games.
If he goes down this path I can only imagine the tax payers dollars that are wasted.

382 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 130


  Reply # 1171015 7-Nov-2014 17:12
Send private message

Has anybody thought that  these services more blatantly advertise the ability to bypass copyright laws than say megaupload?

I mean I used to recommend megaupload as a solution to customers wanting to send large attachments by email.
Can anybody think of any use of global mode other than deliberately by passing regional rights holders?




Please note: I have a professional bias towards Vodafone.

13151 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6172

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1171017 7-Nov-2014 17:18
One person supports this post
Send private message

I am of two minds with this, whilst I agree with the need to control illegal content e.g pornography or breaching classification rules  I do not believe the carrier is at fault, any charges should be laid against those obtaining illegal content.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


3127 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 947

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1171045 7-Nov-2014 17:55
Send private message

sen8or: Pretty skinny straws they are clutching at, and all the exposure in the Herald can't be doing Slingshot / Orcon any harm as more people will begin to wonder "what this netflix thing is", afterall, theres no such thing as bad publicity

Agreed. And now I know about, I'm thinking I'd like to watch Maniac...

2561 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1207


  Reply # 1171087 7-Nov-2014 19:25
3 people support this post
Send private message

Jaxar: Has anybody thought that  these services more blatantly advertise the ability to bypass copyright laws than say megaupload?

I mean I used to recommend megaupload as a solution to customers wanting to send large attachments by email.
Can anybody think of any use of global mode other than deliberately by passing regional rights holders?


Sigh

They aren't bypassing "copyright laws", just regional exclusive distributorship arrangements that have been the bane of NZ consumers for decades. It's the same as if you parallel import a book from Amazon rather than pay twice as much to go through the NZ distributor and retailer. The product is legit, and the content owner is still getting paid.

Torrents and Megaupload were a different kettle of fish, they were trading in illegal copies. If watching Netflix in NZ was a breach of the law, don't you think the Studios would have made a few high-profile prosecutions by now to emphasise that. They haven't, and they won't, because it isn't illegal and they know they would lose.

The rest of your argument has about as much force as saying that there is something dodgy about CourierPost because they blatantly advertise their willingness to carry packages from Amazon, to deliberately bypass the regional rights holders in the book industry. In short, it's nonsense.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.