Posts by Mark Harris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Special powers bring special responsibility. To require the alleged infringer to refute via the courts creates an even greater burden...which is even more bung.
Not quite, jon, as the court process would hold the defendant innocent until the charge is proved. That's the issue with s92A that people have been calling "guilt by accusation" because, unlike court, you have to prove your innocence.
-
Things change fast so there's no point in quoting what he said in 2004.
These are the things he said in his submission to the TCF dated 10 March 2009
This is an excerpt from the Geekzone Q & A. From the answer there is no need to have s92 at all. If the evidence is so robust, prosecute.
Well, you'd think. Especially as it's only going to apply to a "tiny minority" (which makes a bit of a mockery of the claim that piracy is changing the business of music).
-
Maybe he believes that people only remember the last press release.
-
I took Mark's main point was that the survey was asking people what they would do in response to a warning notice, rather than looking at evidence of what people actually did do.
Correct, and what I meant to add is that anyone who has done usability testing on systems knows that what people say they do and what they actually do are very different things.
That would be the museum of nausea, right? :-)
That's such a great building, it goes on forever ;-)
-
-
The point is creative freedom and others have been attacking Campbell and RIANZ on the grounds that Campbell makes stuff up
It's an easy mistake to make, because Campbell Smith does**make shit up. In his submission to the TCF on the code of conduct, he says:
Research shows that the sending of warning notices explaining the possibility of disconnection in itself would be sufficient to stop the vast majority of infringing behaviour, without the need to reach the step of termination
Research shows nothing of the sort. The source of this is a survey run by the UK firm Entertainment Media Research and commissioned by a specialist media law firm to show to perspective clients. There's no methodology, just a bland statement from their sample of 1608 people (out of 61m) that 70% of them **say they'd stop if they thought they would be caught. Not a huge sample and not representative of the New Zealand market anyway.The evidence that the recording industry provides to ISPs is highly reliable, well-tested and has been accepted in countries around the world as the basis of criminal and civil legal actions.
So not true. The evidence has been contested ad nauseum . So far, there's only been one successful prosecution by the RIAA, and the judge has overturned that verdict and ordered a new trial. The RIAA's evidentiary process has netted laser printers, dead people and people who don't even have computers.
A three-step approach is the standard in other countries where a similar graduated response is in effect or under discussion
This is plain and simple spin, and deceptive at that, as no other country has implemented this as a law, and the 'voluntary' scheme that has been strongarmed into Eircom as settlement for a different court dispute, has yet to be tested.
So, don't go holdin Smith out as some saint, 'cos he aint.
-
Ah, brilliant! You should have contacted their ISP under s92C :-D
-
Classic 'devils on horseback' Mark
Ah, that's what they're called. Cool. Me, I just eat 'em ;-)
<quoteI'm told by my meat-eating sibs that wrapping the prunes in genuine prosciuto is even better...</quote>
Orly? My local butcher makes his own prosciutto. Mmmm...
-
Spoilsport
-
Also, prunes wrapped in strips of bacon, stick a toothpick through to hold it together and grill and heat in oven (200) for 5-8 minutes, and nom nom nom