Hard News: The file-sharing bill
340 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 14 Newer→ Last
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Now I'm not saying the NZ Parliament ought to be stuffed with PhDs. But do we have even one person with the sort of academic track record Leigh has? Do we have a successful business person?
Dave Cunliffe is a Fulbright Scholar with a Masters from Harvard. And Dave Parker has a background in bio-tech.
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
how do they resolve the difference in geographical and virtual location?
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 be committed in New Zealand, whether the person charged with the offence was in New Zealand or not at the time of the act, omission, or event
Whether a computer performing processing is an "act" or an "event" is I guess a subject for legal discussion.
-
Rex Widerstrom, in reply to
Sadly that's still regarded as being class traitors by some
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. If only more of those phlegmatic, blind ideologues on t'other side had your majestic adherence to evidence-based conclusions, etc etc.
Cross away from our side of the debate and you're a self-interested class traitor who has betrayed the principles of solidarity. Etc.
Comes back to what I'm saying about political parties and their "you're either 100% with us or you're against us" atttitude to candidate selection and ranking.
* I'm assuming, knowing PASers. I took no part in those debates because, frankly, I couldn't be arsed absorbing enough information on which to form a considered opinion.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Will have a look tomorrow
It'll keep. Until about November.
-
@Deep Red:
Ah, didn't know that about Cunliffe. I knew there had to be some reason I didn't skim past his utterances chortling to myself though. Thanks.
-
Sacha, in reply to
betrayed the principles of solidarity
Apparently wanting movements or organisations to be actually competent is not acting in their interests. Best never challenge the poor dears. If only some of the tunnel-vision tosspots could see how patronising that is - and really very unsupportive in a more mature sense.
-
Stuff article on Teh internets law, I would normally embed the URL but...
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/4882838/government-is-totally-fuckedNot much of an article but the url says it all.
-
Sacha, in reply to
The discovery that any Stuff url could be hacked by appending your choice of text was one of the pleasant diversions on Twitter during the parliamentary 'debate'.
-
"What I don't think people understand is exshully that ... it's illegal to fileshare?"
Watching that Katrina Shanks video on the other thread actually makes me incredibly pissed off when I think about the days I spent crafting an extensive, thoughtful, nuanced argument -- from the point of view of a filmmaker whose work has been pirated -- against this bill ... Only to see that they've clearly absorbed so very little of the information that they must have been dealing with -- let alone arguments and information that might take a little thinking about.
Embarrassing.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Me too. I don't even recall her being there when I made my oral submission. I'm sure she didn't say anything.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Embarrassing
Oh yes. Melissa Lee makes our nation famous on the world stage (in tech publication terms).
-
Apart from anything else, that is plenty of legitimately-shared content on P2P networks, Blizzard and other game companies use the same protocols to legitimately serve their updates, etc. OTOH, the ignorant blatherings of Lee,Shanks and Young are hardly cause for confidence.
Well if I ever saw a law that had protocol descriptions I'd probably faint! You are right about the protocols being used for a lot more than dodgy filesharing, however I don't think the lobbyists will be trumpeting the distinctions. In a less paranoid frame of mind one could also imagine a deliberately badly worded law that would allow an ISP to be sued by an interested party if they felt they needed to. Maybe just the chilling effect of one or two suits would be enough to turn ISPs towards more throttling or denial of service to avoid the performance. Time to take off the tinfoil hat now, but sometimes those legislators seem to make anything possible.
-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/4882838/government-is-totally-fucked
anyone notice the URL from stuff.co.nz
hehe funny
-
TroyHoward, in reply to
doh!............damn it....i guess you did.......i'm going bed.
-
Absolute comedy gold from Liam Dann in Granny this morning:
Shanks backed up her case by saying she was pretty savvy on computers. That's like saying that because you are savvy at existing within the dimensions of space/time you're qualified to wade into debates about quantum physics.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Has Labour said why they didn't support his amendment?
Check their own blog and tell us what you think they're saying. I'm unclear beyond some general mumble about compromise.
A sell-out. Clare Curran can spin it how she likes, but it doesn't work for me. Apologists for them are saying it was the best deal under the circumstances, because if they hadn't worked with the Nats it would have been termination for anyone caught. It doesn't ring true. Yellow-bellied, to my mind. I'm disappointed.
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
Hilarious. There is hope for journalism in this country yet.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
A sell-out. Clare Curran can spin it how she likes, but it doesn’t work for me. Apologists for them are saying it was the best deal under the circumstances, because if they hadn’t worked with the Nats it would have been termination for anyone caught. It doesn’t ring true. Yellow-bellied, to my mind. I’m disappointed.
I'm in danger of getting grumpy about this. Gareth gave a stirring speech, but there's more to it than that. There's a reason that people like Jordan Carter and David Farrar weren't screaming blue murder about the final bill -- it's because they've been working on it for some time, they knew what was coming and they know they've got most of what they wanted.
Clare Curran has also been on this pretty much since the election, starting with winning the argument within the caucus about support for 92A. People might not agree with the decision she made to get a reasonably significant last-minute change to a bill that would have passed anyway, but I just don't think "yellow-bellied" is a fair or reasonable way to describe Curran.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
To clarify - using this description is more for the party as a whole. I've been a Labour voter all my life, apart from a very early foray into Social Credit. Everything lately has made me feel scared for the country, and I'd feel a hell of a lot better if there was some true "feistiness" coming back - I thought Hughes made a few good points which should have had the support of more than just Harawira and Carter from other parties. That Labour voted against the Hughes amendment needs some explaining.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Apologists for them are saying it was the best deal under the circumstances, because if they hadn’t worked with the Nats it would have been termination for anyone caught. It doesn’t ring true.
You may not like it, or believe it, but that's what Labour said in the House on the night . Call it apologism or whatever else you want, but at about 7 minutes into Jacinda Ardern's speech she said exactly what these "apologists" are saying - that Labour's choice was the compromise to have the current Act, or to have the Act with account revocation in immediate effect rather than pending an Order-in-Council.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Labour’s choice was the compromise to have the current Act, or to have the Act with account revocation in immediate effect rather than pending an Order-in-Council.
Thanks for pointing it out - it's something I should have known, but didn't.
I don't watch Parliament - you probably guessed that - but maybe will from now on - especially anything being pushed through under urgency. Perhaps I will also have to learn how to tweet, so I can communicate more readily? With those people who are making laws in seeming vacuums? -
The apologism sounds more like cold feet to me, since a lot of them would likely have personally supported the Hughes amendment if it was put to a conscience vote.
And as Liam Dann wrote in his article, it's a clash between the 'property rights' old economy and the 'weightless' new economy, which has exposed certain limits of traditional private property rights.
-
You’re getting the wrong end of the stick. The point I was trying to make is that there are cameras that will pick out who is at the wheel, regardless of who owns the car.
Not really Grant. The bill is sent to the car owner. If you can prove that your car was stolen you will get off. If it's your son/wife/friend driving, it's your responsibility to get them to pay the bill.
I never would have shelled out the very large amount of money for the Region-1-only Firefly DVDs if I hadn’t watched it through rather less legal means.
I'm the same. I ended up buying the complete set of The Wire end of last year after torrenting it down on people's recommendations here.
I'll also buy the entire set of Friday Night Lights once the distributors actually bring it into the country, until then I'll keep my torrented versions on my hard drive.
I heard him on bFM about an hour ago. He’s very clear, very forthright, and I believe, will some day be PM.
Maybe if he switches parties. Despite the world moving substantially over the past 20 years to adopt green ideas, the Greens aren't gaining substantial support, probably because they've been successful enough to have the major parties adopt their "radical" ideas 10 - 30 years after they have them.
Of course there is the youtube of him floating about wherein he promises to resign from Parliament if he doesn’t get the student loan scheme cancelled. So he may be a tad tender about the intertubes…
Student fees. He introduced the student loan scheme so promising to abolish it would be bizarre even for him, but campaigned on "abolishing the $1250 fee" that Labour put in place in 1990. Of course he did abolish the fee - by allowing the universities to set their own fees, and then he hacked their funding every year.
Dave Cunliffe is a Fulbright Scholar with a Masters from Harvard. And Dave Parker has a background in bio-tech.
Nick Smith has a 1st class engineering honours degree, an AFS Scholar to the US, and holds a PhD on NZ landslides. There's no shortage of people who have done well academically in parliament, or indeed done well in business, there's some structural problems beyond who is there.
-
Why should academic qualifications correlate with a rational attitude to public policy? Edward Teller.
-
Labour's attitude to this bill illustrates what's wrong with their attitude to being in opposition. They almost appear to consider that National are pretty much on the right track, and if they can persuade them to make a few tweaks, they'll enact good policy.
The fact is that any changes made to this bill are symbolic. It's largely ineffective anyway, as previously discussed. Labour would have done better to propose amendments and vote against the bill when they weren't adopted.
With a few exceptions, I didn't see the National party supporting Labour policies when they were in opposition. They opposed, and that helped them create a political distinction.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.