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.




1348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 159

Trusted

Topic # 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
+1 received by user: 842
Inactive user


  Reply # 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.

10534 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1746

Trusted

  Reply # 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

 
 
 
 


2809 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1222


  Reply # 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



174 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 38


  Reply # 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..

25826 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5555

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 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.

4129 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1676

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 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 Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

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


6433 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1570


  Reply # 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.





3081 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 846

Trusted

  Reply # 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

730 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 236


  Reply # 1389623 18-Sep-2015 11:32
2 people support this post
Send private message

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.

2071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 227

Subscriber

  Reply # 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.

6202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2907

Subscriber

  Reply # 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 reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


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:





News »

New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54


How clever is this: AI will create 2.3 million jobs by 2020
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:52


NOW to deploy SD-WAN to regional councils
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:46


Mobile market competition issues ComCom should watch
Posted 18-Dec-2017 10:52


New Zealand government to create digital advisory group
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:47


Australia datum changes means whole country moving 1.8 metres north-east
Posted 16-Dec-2017 08:39



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.