Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Someone should have checked this press release from John Barnett of South Pacific Pictures, because it shows a fairly shocking lack of understanding of a range of laws:
John Barnett says, “This section [92A] is the front line protection for copyright holders, whose work is being stolen on a constant basis on the net. The legislation requires Internet Providers to take some responsibility for what appears on their sites, just as print publishers, T.V and radio stations are responsible for material they disseminate.”
Broadcasters are responsible for material they broadcast in a range of ways -- including most notably in terms of broadcasting standards. The same explicitly and deliberately does not apply to telecommunications companies (we settled that in the mid-90s when a select committee threw out Trevor Rodgers' crazy-assed internet censorship bill). It's just a daft thing to say.
And, er, "on their sites"?
-
Kudos to everyone who worked so hard, and stayed so reasonable, achieving this result
Indeed. I do like to think I'm a reasonable sort of pig-fucker.
-
Thanks - so I guess it's a more informal thing with Government deciding if most major parties seem to be happy enough.
That's the weird thing. There's no formal right in the law for RIANZ et al to have a view on the TCF code -- it's more of a courtesy.
The TCF seems to be in quite a strong position. Hopefully they won't turn around and dump on their customers by shifting cost and other burdens that way.
-
Indeed it was, though I should point out that when Craig says 'soberly', he's speaking for himself. I was elegantly trashed.
You also displayed an admirable sense of duty in taking over the bar.
-
Who is the group that provides formal agreement?
The Telecommunications Carriers Forum has written the draft code for its members and is negotiating with RIANZ et al. But that doesn't cover the other parties likely to be regarded as ISPs under the law.
-
Result!
Government announces delay in 92A enactment until March 29. If no agreement by then, it will be suspended.
Hat-tip: MsBehaviour on Twitter.
My reading is that this puts pressure on the owners' lobby to deal.
Even if agreement reached, government to monitor first six months and review.
-
Ha, this thread turned rather hilarious didn't it? A bunch of people relatively calmly wading through the practical implications of the legislation, before one of the lead drivers of that legislation weighs in, tells everyone they know nothing about prison as a deterrent because they don't have a background like his and then complains nobody wants to discuss the bill!
Indeed. I genuinely applaud Mr Garrett's initiative in coming here to discuss his bill -- in the same breath as I lament his rather odd approach to discussion.
-
Hi all. I'll get in first to explain that this is something of a conversational media experiment, which will be staged across the Scoop Media advertising network, with the conversation itself taking place here on Public Address. It has been sponsored by Xero.
-
Thank you for the interviews! Utterly baffling about the exporting to the web problems though. Maybe professional television people should invest in an ancient MacBook, a copy of iMovie, and a 10 year old.
Well, yeah. If I hadn't been out of town, I'd have seen if I could get the raw DV files and exported them to MP4 myself. The unfitness of the Avid for non-traditional talks is bewildering.
Also really enjoyed and was inspired by your talk at Webstock. And was astounded to see the ultra-productive Russell Brown is a two-fingered typist! Respect.
Shhh!
-
Thanks for the Blend. I didn't quite know what to expect, and found it fascinating
Thanks. I thought it went really well, but despite my best efforts, we only have fairly ropey video coverage. We'll do better next time on that front.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 … 2279 Older→ First