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.




1463 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

# 180688 18-Sep-2015 00:49
4 people support this post
Send private message

LOL:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/71969611/illegal-downloaders-get-off-scot-free-as-copyright-tribunal-process-too-expensive

They actually invalidate their own argument by saying they are losing millions due to infringements, but somehow can't justify spending $375 per case to prosecute...

This is exactly why the law was designed the way it was; so that copyright holders couldn't just spam out thousands of unproven infringement notices at no cost.  It's nice to see legislation doing its job!


Create new topic
4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  # 1389398 18-Sep-2015 05:32
Send private message

I guess they have put a number on a maximum fine for anyone actually ending up in court.

18505 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 1389404 18-Sep-2015 07:20
Send private message

I suspect the hardcore, tech iterate one circumvent detection. The uptake of music steaming and SVOD takes away the oomph in illicit downloads. Unlimited BB has probably helped SVOD flourish rather than "alternative" sites

 
 
 
 


3231 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1389454 18-Sep-2015 07:53
One person supports this post
Send private message

Music availability, timeliness and value has increased markedly.  The concept of 'owning' music is just about obsolete now.  I wouldn't be surprised if pirated music is on a sharp decline.  

Now if only we could get the movie and TV studios to start thinking the same way.  "Pirating" would be a remnant left only to a select few.  
    




Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman



218 posts

Master Geek


  # 1389510 18-Sep-2015 08:47
Send private message

SamF: LOL:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/71969611/illegal-downloaders-get-off-scot-free-as-copyright-tribunal-process-too-expensive

They actually invalidate their own argument by saying they are losing millions due to infringements, but somehow can't justify spending $375 per case to prosecute...

This is exactly why the law was designed the way it was; so that copyright holders couldn't just spam out thousands of unproven infringement notices at no cost.  It's nice to see legislation doing its job!



Curious as to where you got $375 from?  You mean $275 (3 x $25 infringement notice and the $200 lodgement fee)?  Regardless, while that maybe the cost for lodging a claim, I suspect the costs are higher to actually bring a successful prosecution, i.e. lawyer fees for building a case and prosecuting, attending the hearing etc.  And as mentioned above, the costs awarded for a successful prosecution probably isn't all that much in comparison to the costs involved to prosecute.

While $25 per notice does not sound like much, I imagine that there would be numerous (article mentioned 1000s) notices that could be issued.  But that would just get plain expensive.  If they don't issue notices to everyone, then how would they choose who to issue notices to?  To me, you either issue notices to everyone, or none at all..

28439 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  # 1389517 18-Sep-2015 08:51
One person supports this post
Send private message

I suspect a significant reason is also the actual penalties being hand down for a successful prosecution are nowhere near what the industry hoped for.

5133 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 1389523 18-Sep-2015 09:05
3 people support this post
Send private message

sbiddle: I suspect a significant reason is also the actual penalties being hand down for a successful prosecution are nowhere near what the industry hoped for.


Exactly; they were hoping to make Scrooge McDuck piles of cash for every infringement, whereas the tribunal has opted for somewhere around 'right's holders costs, the price of the song/movie, and another $100 for being a naughty person'. I'm always pleasantly surprised when the system works.




iPad Pro 11" + iPhone XS + 2degrees 4tw!

 

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


6434 posts

Uber Geek


  # 1389532 18-Sep-2015 09:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

since we don't like it when the rights holders make absurdly outlandish claims about the size of their losses when it comes to pirated content, I think it only fair we should maintain the moral high ground and not make outlandishly low claims about the cost to them of enforcing their rights.

It's not as simple as $375 per case. It actually costs them tens of thousands of dollars just to get one person to the tribunal for the following reason:

1) the loopholes in the law mean that people can easily avoid getting a 2nd or third strike by switching ISPs, switching to private trackers, or just changing the name on their broadband account.

2) with most ISPs using dynamic IPs as standard for their customers, coupled with the cool-down periods in the law between notices, this mean that a rights holder can't simply target an IP address and only send notices to that address.  By the time they get onto their 2nd or third notice, that person almost certainly won't be at that IP address anymore, so to get somebody onto their 2nd and 3rd strike, they actually need to take a shotgun approach and spam masses of notices, most of which will just end up being first strikes.

So in order to take 1 person to the tribunal,  the rights holder needs to send hundreds, maybe thousands of notices - and so that will cost them tens of thousands of dollars,  not $375.

and that's just what they have to pay to the ISPs.  There are, of course, costs of setting up and maintaining their systems of tracking the content through bittorrent, as well as paying people to manage all the back and forth between the ISPs and studios,  and the lawyers they have to pay $x000 per day to represent them at the tribunal, even though they only get awarded a few hundred dollars in damages.

so to claim the cost of enforcing their rights is only $375 is simply not true.





 
 
 
 


3368 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 1389559 18-Sep-2015 09:41
6 people support this post
Send private message

NonprayingMantis:
It's not as simple as $375 per case. It actually costs them tens of thousands of dollars just to get one person to the tribunal for the following reason:


I'd have to disagree.

Many people I know stopped torrenting without even getting a single letter when the law first came into effect, especially when a few letters were sent out initially. IMO the average Joe Public will stop if they either hear of people getting letters or get one themselves. Therefore IMO the recording industry could have a large effect on piracy rates if they just kept sending out the first strike letters. The number where they would actually need to go through the whole process would I believe be very low.

Even if we go with your "tens of thousands" for each case - surely the millions they would make from stopping piracy (because all those claimed losses would suddenly turn into profits right?) would make it worthwhile?

I suspect the real reason they've given up is because they know that their real losses from piracy are very low. Every download does not represent a lost sale, because people who want to buy it will just buy it, and those who want to pirate it will just find another way or won't buy it at all if they can't.

JWR

784 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 1389623 18-Sep-2015 11:32
2 people support this post

NonprayingMantis: since we don't like it when the rights holders make absurdly outlandish claims about the size of their losses when it comes to pirated content, I think it only fair we should maintain the moral high ground and not make outlandishly low claims about the cost to them of enforcing their rights.

It's not as simple as $375 per case. It actually costs them tens of thousands of dollars just to get one person to the tribunal for the following reason:

1) the loopholes in the law mean that people can easily avoid getting a 2nd or third strike by switching ISPs, switching to private trackers, or just changing the name on their broadband account.

2) with most ISPs using dynamic IPs as standard for their customers, coupled with the cool-down periods in the law between notices, this mean that a rights holder can't simply target an IP address and only send notices to that address.  By the time they get onto their 2nd or third notice, that person almost certainly won't be at that IP address anymore, so to get somebody onto their 2nd and 3rd strike, they actually need to take a shotgun approach and spam masses of notices, most of which will just end up being first strikes.

So in order to take 1 person to the tribunal,  the rights holder needs to send hundreds, maybe thousands of notices - and so that will cost them tens of thousands of dollars,  not $375.

and that's just what they have to pay to the ISPs.  There are, of course, costs of setting up and maintaining their systems of tracking the content through bittorrent, as well as paying people to manage all the back and forth between the ISPs and studios,  and the lawyers they have to pay $x000 per day to represent them at the tribunal, even though they only get awarded a few hundred dollars in damages.

so to claim the cost of enforcing their rights is only $375 is simply not true.



As a regular New Zealand citizen, try taking anyone to court and see how much it costs you.

Copyright holders at least have less costly option (paid for by taxes) in the Copyright Tribunal.

2078 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 1389645 18-Sep-2015 11:55
Send private message

JWR:
NonprayingMantis: since we don't like it when the rights holders make absurdly outlandish claims about the size of their losses when it comes to pirated content, I think it only fair we should maintain the moral high ground and not make outlandishly low claims about the cost to them of enforcing their rights.

It's not as simple as $375 per case. It actually costs them tens of thousands of dollars just to get one person to the tribunal for the following reason:

1) the loopholes in the law mean that people can easily avoid getting a 2nd or third strike by switching ISPs, switching to private trackers, or just changing the name on their broadband account.

2) with most ISPs using dynamic IPs as standard for their customers, coupled with the cool-down periods in the law between notices, this mean that a rights holder can't simply target an IP address and only send notices to that address.  By the time they get onto their 2nd or third notice, that person almost certainly won't be at that IP address anymore, so to get somebody onto their 2nd and 3rd strike, they actually need to take a shotgun approach and spam masses of notices, most of which will just end up being first strikes.

So in order to take 1 person to the tribunal,  the rights holder needs to send hundreds, maybe thousands of notices - and so that will cost them tens of thousands of dollars,  not $375.

and that's just what they have to pay to the ISPs.  There are, of course, costs of setting up and maintaining their systems of tracking the content through bittorrent, as well as paying people to manage all the back and forth between the ISPs and studios,  and the lawyers they have to pay $x000 per day to represent them at the tribunal, even though they only get awarded a few hundred dollars in damages.

so to claim the cost of enforcing their rights is only $375 is simply not true.



As a regular New Zealand citizen, try taking anyone to court and see how much it costs you.

Copyright holders at least have less costly option (paid for by taxes) in the Copyright Tribunal.


The ISPs are also partially funding the cost of enforcement.  When this law first came in the cost of processing these notices was over $25 and given the small volumes sent I doubt there has been much investment in automation to bring the cost down.

Lock him up!
10960 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  # 1389764 18-Sep-2015 15:23
3 people support this post
Send private message

sidefx: 

I suspect the real reason they've given up is because they know that their real losses from piracy are very low. Every download does not represent a lost sale, because people who want to buy it will just buy it, and those who want to pirate it will just find another way or won't buy it at all if they can't.


Finally, someone who states it like it is.





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


Create new topic



Switch your broadband provider now - compare prices


Twitter and LinkedIn »



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:





News »

Intel introduces cryogenic control chip to enable quantum computers
Posted 10-Dec-2019 21:32


Vodafone 5G service live in four cities
Posted 10-Dec-2019 08:30


Samsung Galaxy Fold now available in New Zealand
Posted 6-Dec-2019 00:01


NZ company oDocs awarded US$ 100,000 Dubai World Expo grant
Posted 5-Dec-2019 16:00


New Zealand Rugby Selects AWS-Powered Analytics for Deeper Game Insights
Posted 5-Dec-2019 11:33


IMAGR and Farro bring checkout-less supermarket shopping to New Zealand
Posted 5-Dec-2019 09:07


Wellington Airport becomes first 5G connected airport in the country
Posted 3-Dec-2019 08:42


MetService secures Al Jazeera as a new weather client
Posted 28-Nov-2019 09:40


NZ a top 10 connected nation with stage one of ultra-fast broadband roll-out completed
Posted 24-Nov-2019 14:15


Microsoft Translator understands te reo Māori
Posted 22-Nov-2019 08:46


Chorus to launch Hyperfibre service
Posted 18-Nov-2019 15:00


Microsoft launches first Experience Center worldwide for Asia Pacific in Singapore
Posted 13-Nov-2019 13:08


Disney+ comes to LG Smart TVs
Posted 13-Nov-2019 12:55


Spark launches new wireless broadband "Unplan Metro"
Posted 11-Nov-2019 08:19


Malwarebytes overhauls flagship product with new UI, faster engine and lighter footprint
Posted 6-Nov-2019 11:48



Geekzone Live »

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


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



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.