©Ivor Hughes

I don’t want to listen? Ive asked over and over for someone to show me where the laws says what these people are claiming. I have shown over and over again that it doesn, and shown that it is the ISP’s that are driving this despite their lies to the contrary, and no one has disproved my claim.

So how can you say I am not listening? Sure you can CLAIM anything you want, but when I PROVE its wrong and you FAIL to PROVE your CLAIM is right, then who is the one not listening?

And what PARANOIA? I can give you th link to the ISP “union” that PROVES the ISP’s want to be able to disconnect you WITHOUT NOTICE, for activites they “reasonably believe” is “illegal” or excessive, and that this PREDATED the amendment to the Copyright Act.

http://www.tcf.org.nz/content/6399c632-f5c1-4a4b-9ccd-46c95be72cc1.html

“The TCF established a working party in September 2007 who developed a draft non-regulated Code for disconnection to meet the following objectives:”

At that page you will find a link to the PDF of the code, where you will find:

“A Service Provider may only Suspend or Restrict a Service without informing the
Customer if the Service Provider reasonably deems the Customer’s activity to
be malicious, illegal, to pose material threat to the Service Provider’s network
or to other users or the account status represents an unusually high usage of
calling or broadband.”

So ISP’s BEFORE the amendment were claiming the right to disconnect you WITHOUT NOTICE for “reasonable” usspicion of illegal activites, or for “excessive” usage.

Case friggin closed.

Simon, you are getting boring. Your paranoia is unwelcome. Please find another playground to screw over.

Colin, enough already. I’m all for free speech, but with that right comes the responsibility to use it properly. Simon Rika has had nothing new to say for some time and I think you can probably block him now, in all fairness.

And I showed the part of the law that would have protected you if you had READ IT. So YOU give it away!

“At least here in NZ without sec 92 I can get a day in court because thats the law .. ”

You still can. Even if Section 92A says what you claim it says, it does not provide immunity from customer lawsuits. So if you feel you were unfairly disconnected you can still sue the ISP… which is the ONLY concern the ISP’s have with this law. Unfortunately it DOESN’T say what you say it does, so that is moot.

You simply can not prove you point because you point IS WRONG.

No comment on the TCF Disconnection policy that includes NO NOTICE DISCONNECTION if you are accused by the ISP of “unusually high usage of
calling or broadband.”

No law requires that, so why aren’t you complaining about THAT policy? Because you have been bamboozled, that’s why.

At least here in NZ without sec 92 I can get a day in court because thats the law .. accusations must be proven in NZ law as it currently stands.

I noticed that your first mention of the amended copyright act was AFTER it was passed (that helps) and made NO MENTION of the disconnection provisions. Seems you were more worried about your ipod than your internet access…

I wonder why?

The TCF’s REAL concern with Section 92A is not that poor users have no rights… What the TCF is concerned about is if they disconnect someone and that person SUES THEM, they have no immunity from the CUSTOMER for complying with an unenforceable law!

They don’t give a shit about YOU as their “Disconnection Code of Practice” proves!