Your presumption of restraint on the part of so called "rights holders" seems misplaced. Currently Lime Wire is being asked for $75 trillion by the US?

This isn't right from what I understand. The termination clause can be activated?

Oh come on, Don. There are a number of similar comments in that thread alone. My point isn't to "supposedly illustrate the position of those that?

i) Is the law sufficient to deter the sort of "pay up or we'll sue" drive by extortion rakcet widely exploted by firms like ACSLaw.

ii) What is the risk opf ending up with the cheesy little?

National MP Katrina Shanks, allegedly "fairly savvy when it comes to computers".
[TL:DW? "file-sharing is actually an illegal activity". File-sharing is "quite different to copyright", etc. Just feel the stupidity.]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfGYfg37aUA

National MP Jonathan Young
[TL:DW??

I am struggling with some of the Chicken Little comments people have been making on teh webz about this?

It strikes me that what counts as a compromise these days is often a solution which benefits no one at all.

It?s important to note that file-sharing is actually an illegal activity.

No, it isn?t, you moron.

And this is a member of the select committee ?

Juha's right. The 2 year period is for review of the law as?

Ta. Fixed.

And that's what got a lot of people's dander up on Twitter last night.

Most were not well-informed about the Bill's content or implications, as seen in knee-jerk calls to reactivate the #blackout campaign with?

(Man, hearing those two is sooo depressing?)

ETA: that would be Katrina Shanks and Jonathan Young, just to be clear. And hearing that she was on the select committee is just mind-blowing.

Why is it our responsibility to ease the burden?

The idea of a tribunal where those subject?

To comply with "free" trade agreements with the US, whose huge entertainment industry is pushing this into as many places as they can rather than change their business models.

That?s like me saying that this post was written with the assent of my computer.

The G-G in approving Orders in Council (as in most other things) acts on the advice of ministers and has no discretion to disagree.

As far as?

[[http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/4887073/Copyright-law-Net-parodists-target-Nat-MPs|I NEED YOUR CLOTHES, YOUR BOOTS AND?

Let's not forget reliable genius Melissa Lee:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IIyk1y9o_8&t=4m45s

And all that with a straight face after her now-famous tweet the previous day. Home taping is killing, etc.

Probably a little bit too inside baseball for most people involved in this debate, but as someone who will be involved in the practical side of this, I'd say?

If we move to comply with anything like the American position in the TPPA talks, it will be time to head?

They're not allowed to refuse, are they?

FM

http://www.techliberty.org.nz

Craig Y

There is significant processing cost to the ISP apart from sending the letter. They would?

Copyright holders spend offensive amounts of money on this – that processing fee is going to have to be pretty freakin significant to phase them, especially if the invoice arrives at the same time as their Russell McVeagh?

OK, now that I?ve thought about it a bit, this will be the out used by the real ?problem customers? (if you want to frame high-volume illegal file sharing?

Legally I THINK they can't – there are a limited set of countries that let the Crown withhold Royal Assent and I don't think we're one of them?
Regardless, practically they wouldn't as I don't believe internet copyright arguments really come close to?

This is about control, not compensation to rights-holders. Our new law is meant to promote rent-seeking on behalf of corporate interests.

Meanwhile, the public domain, that garden of intellectual works which we all draw upon to?

Some wag last night was speculating that Melissa Lee can probably see Alaska from hers

"Overall I?d say those on the ?Internet side? got around 80% of what we wanted, and the rights holders didn?t get anywhere near what they wanted."

Although nobody should ever be under an illusion that this is as an adequate measure of fairness and compromise. Otherwise?

Are these two clowns list MPs or did someone actually tick a box and vote for them!?!?

Why would you be surprised? It has happened in every other country that has passed this sort of legislation. Indeed, it already happens here.

By the way,?

Jonathan Young: MP for New Plymouth.
Katrina Shanks: List.

Before a bill can become law, the Royal Assent (the monarch?s approval) is required. The Governor-General acts on the Monarch?s behalf; in theory, he or she may grant the Royal Assent (making the bill law), or withhold?

Like some kind of ghastly bubonic Tetris, Twitter feeds in New Zealand were last night raining little?

Will be watching this space very carefully...

What, the ones that demonstrate to select committee members how computers work?
;)

We had little boxes sitting along the front of the select committee and they?d explain how it takes?

Talk about Twitter tennis. Game, set & match to the nephew.

And the comments at the end are priceless:

Tau HenareApril 14, 2011 at 12:50 pm
NIce article but i dunno about calling me eager for credibility.

Fiona RaeApril 14, 2011 at 2:04 pm
The phrase was ?creditably eager?. Not the?

And then some canny person will complain to the police about the rights-holder's fraud.

I'd expect ISPs to be charging $100-$250 as a reasonable attempt at recouping costs. It's?

In reality, the increased cost to business the new copyright act is likely to bring will be much higher. See Paul Brislen's comments.

People ticked a box to vote for list MPs – it's the one that says "National" or "Labour" by it. If you don't like the people on the list, don't vote for the?

The best I can point to is Sir Cyril Newall (discussed at page 718 of Philip Joseph's seminal text Constitutional and Administrative Law in New Zealand (2nd ed.):

Sir Cyril, Governor-General from 1941-1946, delayed signing a?

That shows the success of poorly-opposed spin. This govt are cowardly bullies who just love throwing their weight around. But, look over there..

Somebody get that woman a regular gig posting on here!

I am not of conspiratorial mind, but I do think that has been an actual strategy this week.

From wikipedia:
In the mid-1990s NAT became a popular tool for alleviating the consequences of IPv4 address exhaustion.[citation needed] It has become a standard, indispensable feature in routers for home and small-office Internet connections. Most systems using NAT do so in?

Yes, how many people with broadband do *not* have a NAT router? I presume these rules will be applying to the account holder of?

NZFACT heralds enactment of
Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill

NZFACT welcomes the enactment of the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill following its second and third reading in Parliament last night. The bill will now go into effect on September 1, 2011.

?We commend the?

I assume so, but I am more referring to large blocks of ISP customer bases sharing the same IPs.

As I understood it, this?

If a user's coming out of a shared IP address (such as NAT), then that does create an interesting issue.

If a complainer knows their IP and outbound port and the NAT server has adequate logs, then it would be possible to trace the user. But the?

You can do that with anything. I fell for it too. :)

Even trickier, WIFI hotspots.

Are you saying she's a bit slow?

Join the club :)

Its things like this?

They were, by those who opposed the bill. The muppets you saw 'debating' it, not so much.

Oh, look – a quiet release of SCF documents:

With Parliament under urgency to pass both the guilt by accusation copyright law and the Canterbury Enabling Act 2.0, today is a good?

No, the IP-address you may have locally, behind your NAT (typically 192.168.0.1-255) is not the IP-address exposed to the internet (hence NAT ? network address translation). That?

None I know of in NZ do this (apparently Vodafone and Telstra in AU). It's a bit of a downgrade for a few?

If I wanted to impact say Starbucks or McDonalds business fortunes, could I as a patron have them brought before the committee by exploiting their connections to pirate stuff??

sadly genuine, and their happiness is all you need to notice

They'll do it to each other, in some sectors

There are many technical fuckups in this law that could've been avoided if *gasp* proper?

Interesting. But that?s unlikely to ?help?. With this law all ISPs must have the ability to match the public IP-address with a customer (not necessarily the same as a user). So even if using NAT at a gateway level, the?

Please forgive a newbie asking a dullard question, and I don't want to sound like someone who can't programme the?

So if you ask an ISP using NAT for details on an IP, they'll give you a number of users that *could* be using that IP at a given time.

It's a flaw with legislation that gets hooked?

Yes, and get this: The officer who conducted the interview with Mr Farmer was ?moved sideways? within the force. Could that bus ticket be any wetter? I can't wait to hear Greg O'Connor's comment.

Wow. Brave man, Thanks Graeme

Jee-zuz fuck!!!

Just when I thought it wasn't possible to despise the Government more.

Yep, pretty much.

In practice, could this have an impact on my freedom of expression (or opportunities to express myself freely)?

For example, while a parent may own the computer and pay the connection bills, it's more likely to?

This bill is egregious to the nth degree. It's much like trying?

Yup, it is. If you were to lend me your car and I went for a hoon it is still your car, your fine.

Tell me again, MMP supporters, just how good is the system which foists these people upon us and how democracy will be the worse for it if we abandon this farce come the referendum.

Yes I know FPP brought us Ben Couch and Merv Wellington,?

Part of the problem with California now is the fact that it has become ungovernable through, I believe, an excess of populism through excessive reliance on referenda, which is not the same as representative democracy. Of course everyone?

And they were not the stupidest elected members. All parties have had their share. Of course, it always seems that National's had a little more than their share... ;-)

But in most professions where an IQ above luke warm is an asset, there's an effective filter to stop those possessed by teh dumb getting through. Unless you've had a surgeon say "the dangly bit next?

And Mallard was interesting.

It was 2007 that the conviction was overturned, so slightly different internal environment. And given that detectives are something of an elite, if the guy got shuffled off?

It does, actually.

I'm sure we agree in principle that even the stupid deserve votes. I'm also sure that we agree that they don't deserve respect.

IQ above luke warm is an asset

You know, there are plenty?

heh
Sorry, busy watching the Court Report.

umm, what? What offence, exactly? He didn't perjure himself, and in any case perjury by police officers is very definitely a criminal offence.

Yes, possibly. But it's not being a cop that stops it being an offence. Maybe write to the IPCA and suggest that they might want to investigate his actions? He's still a serving officer, it seems, so?

I hear that there's a global helium supply crisis...

I might well, but I would have thought that that was the job of our alleged representatives, as I?ve noted before.?

I am concerned that the officer who behaved with gross inappropriateness regarding the interrogation of Aaron Farmer is not facing a serious inquiry.

In particular, I note this news report:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10719246

and this Radio New Zealand interview:

http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/ntn/ntn-20110414-0907-Aaron_Farmer_wrongfully_imprisoned-048.mp3

which suggest that the officer?

I believe the first question from my non-lawyerly?

Bollocks, there is no shortage of people sounding rather elevated in their manner of speech.

Precisely, those who know what they are doing will nearly always find a way to do it discreetly. I'd also be somewhat wary of trusting?

I don?t know how it?ll work, but I suspect they will go after people seeding new or unreleased albums/blockbuster movies.

The interesting thing to see will be whether they go after people seeding stuff unlikely to be released in NZ (e.g. plenty of lesser-known overseas TV shows), or whether they?

I suspect you're right. Mark Kneebone of IMNZ once told me they're aware of people seeding hundreds of albums 24/7. I'd expect they'll be the ones to get nastygrams.

National MP Melissa Lee spoke out strongly against illegal file-sharing this week, but does she practise what she preaches?

As the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment bill passed its third reading, Ms Lee told the House: "Breaking a law, whether it is actually assault on a person?

That's how the RIAA etc have been instituting their?

You're getting the wrong end of the stick. The point I was trying to make is?

Sometimes I idly wonder if the end goal of certain groups is just to get P2P and similar activity banned altogether, and make it illegal?

Noting of course that such tighter rules could themselves be easily changed

A millipede with OCD and a gatling gun couldn't shoot itself in the foot more often

I had a conversation with a local Labour Party committee member in Auckland who is in despair at the leadership. When grass roots members don't see leadership that is a huge problem.?

That's priceless.

That would be a wet dream for a lot of companies that have been hurt by file sharing. Can't see it ever happening, though.

I think that's unfair. Even if you think they should have voted simply against the bill — which would have passed anyway — rather than doing the deal to require specific enactment before termination is available, Clare Curran has been highly engaged?

"Rather than oppose it outright, we preferred to compromise to ensure New Zealanders are not denied access to the internet."

hmmm

and the "111-11 vote against Gareth Hughes? amendment to the?

I?d be a bit pissed off if?

Yeah he could at least share them with you

I was thinking today about this idea that all file sharing was by?

I mean, if they *start* sending a letter and take ages to print and mail it, so you end up getting three?

No, I certainly wasn't trying to imply that. More that if you want to be certain that justice is done, don't rely on others doing something that,?

Whole conversation right there.

_connection drops_

_picks up netbook and walks to nearest Starbucks_

Right there.

Apparently so. It?s being pushed by Grant Robertson and David Farrar, curiously enough.

Melissa Lee explains herself:

I just had one of those ??you don?t know __anything__?

Even if they did push that?

That might be an unconscious goal, sort of an immune system response from a beast that doesn't want to change to match?

Yet I'd have to say her speeches during the session were rambling and overly engaged in the pettiness of the House. Jacinda Ardern and David Parker were far better and clearly understood what they were talking about.

I understand Labour may?

Brilliant – had never heard that one.

Even conversations around P2P are becoming irrelevant.

Streaming content isn't P2P, and is advanced as a method of content control.

It's one the primary method of illegal sharing of content we have.

Careful disclaimers on Youtube's part shift liability?

I consider it very, very telling that Farrar is objecting publicly to National's abuse of urgency.

I?d be a bit pissed off if?

And so they can't lay criminal charges, but only fine the account holder/impound the account. Much like they do with vehicular offences. You do get fined if somebody else parks your?

Can't stop the signal.

#serenity

Jonathan Young = Jayne Cobb on the intelligence scale?

Nah, I think Young?s the narc they dumped in the first episode.

Jayne's way smarter than that.

Yes, come to think of it, you're right.

This distraction into Firefly/Serenity matters is somewhat appropriate given the means by which I first encountered the programme.

Moving back on topic...

At the very least, he has much better taste in colleagues.

Can?t stop the signal.

Or take the Sky (content)? ;)

This distraction into Firefly/Serenity matters is somewhat appropriate given the means by which I first encountered the programme.

For me, that's actually an excellent?

we all need to become journalists or teachers

Including this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJe7vk-GgvQ

You can watch Youtube on it though. Amazon have a?

Oh thank god someone else has come to that conclusion! Yes.

Also:

Yes, if you were torrenting kiddy-porn, then the authorities would really want to know who exactly was responsible. But that's not going to be of interest to?

I heard him on bFM about an hour ago. He's very clear, very forthright, and I believe, will some day be PM. Quite the most intelligent speaker on this subject, from Parliament, so far. But that?

Not really, no.

Hah! Takes me back to my first arrest... or was it my second? Anyway, a long time ago as shall become apparent.

Mr Plod storms into the interview room and tells me my friend is next?

No. But that model certainly is being exploited by patent trolls far and wide.

And into which box of fruit loops would we jump, exactly?

Unless Russell's up for forming a PAS party, in which case I'm ready with my sub :-) Because there's a?

Heh...you should hear the Speaker on the tabling of quotes from blogs. He can barely bring himself to say the word.
Of course there is the youtube of him floating about wherein he promises to resign from?

So if use of a VPN is going to force an ISP to work very hard to track down the illegal downloaders (and clearly its already hard enough even without a?

Check their own blog and tell us what you think they're saying. I'm unclear beyond some general mumble about compromise. They're drawing a fair caning about it.

Patents != copyrights.

Hmmm... The Chinese government is pretty good at that internet policing thing...

Sadly that's still regarded as being class traitors by some.

Oh-oh. No time and I'm away for the evening. Will have a look tomorrow. (Ever the procrastinator!)

Anderton became general manager of an engineering firm, I believe. He's a dirty capitalist at heart.

Intellectual property = intellectual property. You seem to be assuming that if I use an analogy that's broken some identifiable respect that I'm using a broken analogy. Every analogy is broken, because the real world is the only thing that maps to the real world.

I'm merely?

Dave Cunliffe is a Fulbright Scholar with a Masters from Harvard. And Dave Parker?

The Crimes Act sez:
For the purpose of jurisdiction, where any act or omission forming part of any offence, or any event necessary to the completion of any offence, occurs in New Zealand, the offence shall be deemed to?

Good grief, castigated for debating the facts* "...rather than offering solidarity..."

It's an aspect of the "Hitchens syndrome" ((c) me, since we're swinging that way now :-P)

Cross to our side of the debate and you're an enlightened, open-minded hero.?