Telstraclear claims first infringer to hit 3 strikes

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Telstraclear claims first infringer to hit 3 strikes

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#100757 18-Apr-2012 13:07

It will be amusing in that household when mum and dad wonder why the internet is cutoff.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/6760917/Copyright-three-strikes-first-infringer

1 | 2 | 3

3926 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 759

Trusted

#611133 18-Apr-2012 13:33

I wonder what happens if they are in contract? Lol imagine spending 50k getting fibre installed then for it to be cut off after a month ;p

Doesn't apply as internet cut off is no available yet.

Speedtest 2019-10-14

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#611138 18-Apr-2012 13:35

surfisup1000: It will be amusing in that household when mum and dad wonder why the internet is cutoff.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/6760917/Copyright-three-strikes-first-infringer

HA HA

Then a fine of up to a $15k.

Maybe its time New Zealand will wake up to the anti-piracy laws.

[sarcasm]
And just maybe 5GB per month is actually more than enough
[/sarcasm]

Kiwipixter

246 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#611159 18-Apr-2012 14:32

Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#611162 18-Apr-2012 14:33

Mauricio?

semigeek

1606 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 124

#611163 18-Apr-2012 14:33

Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

The infringer probably should have bought the music in the first place instead of downloading it illegally

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#611166 18-Apr-2012 14:37

Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

LOL How much illegal downloading do you do?

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 52

Trusted

#611171 18-Apr-2012 14:43

semigeek:
Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

The infringer probably should have bought the music in the first place instead of downloading it?illegally?

Yes, they should have just got it from YouTube.

almaznz

89 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#611183 18-Apr-2012 14:57

The tribunal can impose a fine of up to $15,000 for serious, flagrant offences under the law, which was designed to discourage people from pirating music and movies using file-sharing services.

However, the Government signalled in a Cabinet paper last year that in some cases it might be sufficient punishment for offenders to reimburse rights holders for the $275 in fees they will have had to incur bringing a case to the tribunal. It has no powers to cut off people's internet access.

This made me laugh

EDIT: forgot to add my part :/

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267

Trusted

#611185 18-Apr-2012 14:59

Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

Is online really more popular than CD now?

almaznz

89 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#611187 18-Apr-2012 15:00

bazzer:
Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

Is online really more popular than CD now?

i don't remember the last physical CD i bought, the last physical music i got was a MxPx LP so it wasn't even a CD

geekiegeek

2513 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 625
Inactive user

#611223 18-Apr-2012 15:46

almaznz:
bazzer:
Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

Is online really more popular than CD now?

i don't remember the last physical CD i bought, the last physical music i got was a MxPx LP so it wasn't even a CD

I still buy CDs for quality reasons, once higher resolution downloads become the norm I will stop. I have stopped downloading movies though due mainly to itunes US. Only thing left is TV :-)

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Kiwipixter

246 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#611224 18-Apr-2012 15:46

BraaiGuy:
Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

LOL How much illegal downloading do you do?

I use youtube other free sources like grooveshark, i already on a large collection of CDs. Popular music are so accessible and cheap these days there is no need to infringe. Mine point is, for the general infringements it would be more beneficial financially for the rights holder to educate and incentivise then to threaten Internet cut-off. Why not send an iTunes or digirama voucher in the first warning for example? This would also educate the infringer that there are legitimate and cheap ways to get the same content.

expression

236 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 13

#611442 18-Apr-2012 20:20

Kiwipixter:
BraaiGuy:
Kiwipixter: Stupid law and doesn't make business sense for the rights holder. The Internet is the main source for purchasing digital music, by cutting off the Internet prevents the infringer from buy the content legitimately. Thats just stupid.

LOL How much illegal downloading do you do?

I use youtube other free sources like grooveshark, i already on a large collection of CDs. Popular music are so accessible and cheap these days there is no need to infringe. Mine point is, for the general infringements it would be more beneficial financially for the rights holder to educate and incentivise then to threaten Internet cut-off. Why not send an iTunes or digirama voucher in the first warning for example? This would also educate the infringer that there are legitimate and cheap ways to get the same content.

A voucher? Seriously? Reward people for breaking the law?