Three Strike internet law update???

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Three Strike internet law update???

sarhali

4 posts

Wannabe Geek

#150532 25-Jul-2014 17:58

Hello,

CAn any 1 please update me whats going on with 3 strike law. I know its still there but are they targeting peer to peer or files hosts like rapidgator..hugefiles...uploaded etc???

1 | 2 | 3

1089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 340

#1095825 25-Jul-2014 19:31

They target the end user on torrent or peer to peer file sharing services. iirc all of the strikes sent have been solely for music infringements, there have been no tribunal cases(after the third strike) since the end of last year :)

sarhali

4 posts

Wannabe Geek

#1095827 25-Jul-2014 19:35

that's what I have read do far only music is targeted ....but I have not been downloading for 3 years now....life seems boring

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#1095832 25-Jul-2014 19:50

sarhali: that's what I have read do far only music is targeted ....but I have not been downloading for 3 years now....life seems boring

Buy the music then instead of stealing it

sarhali

4 posts

Wannabe Geek

#1095833 25-Jul-2014 19:51

I never downloaded music

Tzoi

425 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 90

#1095953 26-Jul-2014 00:59

iirc the film industry is refusing to pay the $25 fine required to get the ISPs to process a claim which is why it has been solely music downloads targeted.

kiwirock

694 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141

#1095957 26-Jul-2014 02:08

My thoughts exactly John.

If one gets bored, one can always work a few more hours and buy a few more CD's.

On a side note, some of the one's I've been buying lately are now quite noisy even some NZ EMI one's with no hypercompression (audio not data) on them. I've bought 6 CD's this week, 2 have a studio transfer or pressing errors on them on the songs I bought them for.

Some are starting to have about as much effort put in to the quality of re-publishing music as those that don't care less how bad they sound via an online download.

I'd buy online, if they'd put a decent amount of music as linear PCM in to something like iTunes. But there's only a few audio engineers around that can hear the difference so my options are fading, like the quality on some CD's now.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

jtbthatsme

937 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 70

Trusted

#1095987 26-Jul-2014 10:14

So the OP asks if there's been any changes or amendments to the copyright infringement law and states he no longer downloads and hasn't for quite some time and half his replies accuse him of stealing or that he needs to buy more music???

Can someone explain how you you got to the conclusion that he's a thief and a breacher of the law??? I read that he used to be and wanted to know if there was now a broader scope for catching infringers instead of the minimalistic approach the law took at implementation with even further minimalistic approach that content rights holders have taken since they had the law come into effect.

Way to make a new Geekzone member feel good about asking a serious question.

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10207

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1096001 26-Jul-2014 11:09

johnr:
Buy the music then instead of stealing it

I prefer to rent my music, only make unlicenced copies of stuff not available to rent that I want to hear and can be bothered, which is almost nothing now. Ive never got so deperate I have walked into a shop and stolen music however. And the disks are normally secured away behind the counterso best you get is an empty case anyway.

Richard rich.ms

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1528

#1096074 26-Jul-2014 12:22

johnr:
sarhali: that's what I have read do far only music is targeted ....but I have not been downloading for 3 years now....life seems boring

Buy the music then instead of stealing it

it's been well established that downloading copyrighted music is not stealing. It is copyright infringement. They are two totally different things.

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 193

#1096095 26-Jul-2014 13:08

Please, not the copyright vs stealing thing again! Let's just say it's wrong and keep the thread on topic!

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1096103 26-Jul-2014 13:21

Tzoi: iirc the film industry is refusing to pay the $25 fine required to get the ISPs to process a claim which is why it has been solely music downloads targeted.

Maybe they haven't found anyone downloading films and it isn't a big enough problem. I mean 25 dollars is a pretty small fee, and apparently doesn't even cover ISPs admin costs in managing it. So if was a problem, I would have thought they would have made an example of some people

Samsung

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

Yabanize

2351 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 583

#1096104 26-Jul-2014 13:23

Its no different to buying music at a second hand shop IMO. The shop and the person who sold it makes the money, None goes back to the artist, who has only been paid once for that album. Similar to how you illegally download an ablum, Someone has paid for it and shared it with everyone else

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1528

#1096119 26-Jul-2014 13:49

mattwnz:
Tzoi: iirc the film industry is refusing to pay the $25 fine required to get the ISPs to process a claim which is why it has been solely music downloads targeted.

Maybe they haven't found anyone downloading films and it isn't a big enough problem. I mean 25 dollars is a pretty small fee, and apparently doesn't even cover ISPs admin costs in managing it. So if was a problem, I would have thought they would have made an example of some people

Lol. It's not $25 to make an example of someone. It's $25 for one notice. And then they need to send hundreds of notices to catch one person 3 times because most people don't have static ips so they have no way of tracking individual people.

So it will cost them several thousand just to get one result.

Yabanize

2351 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 583

#1096126 26-Jul-2014 14:07

NonprayingMantis:
mattwnz:
Tzoi: iirc the film industry is refusing to pay the $25 fine required to get the ISPs to process a claim which is why it has been solely music downloads targeted.

Maybe they haven't found anyone downloading films and it isn't a big enough problem. I mean 25 dollars is a pretty small fee, and apparently doesn't even cover ISPs admin costs in managing it. So if was a problem, I would have thought they would have made an example of some people

Lol. It's not $25 to make an example of someone. It's $25 for one notice. And then they need to send hundreds of notices to catch one person 3 times because most people don't have static ips so they have no way of tracking individual people.

So it will cost them several thousand just to get one result.

But the ISP will have logs of who had which IP when?

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10207

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1096131 26-Jul-2014 14:15

The torrent tracking places do profile users clients to track them across IP addresses.

Richard rich.ms

1 | 2 | 3