it.gen.nz

Writings on technology and society from Wellington, New Zealand

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Don’t like the Copyright Act? Go to Parliament at 12 today!

Today is the day to turn up and tell politicians what you think of S92a of the Copyright Act. There’s a petition being handed in. Come by noon, and wear bright clothes!

posted by colin at 7:12 am  

3 Comments

  1. I posted this on an earlier entry but I am reposting it because I’d like an answer:

    Can someone explain to me where in section 92A it says an ISP *HAS* to disconnect someone on *accusation alone*?

    “An Internet service provider must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances, of the account with that Internet service provider of a repeat infringer.”

    OK, here is a “policy” that “provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances”:

    “Any user convicted in a court of law of repeat copyright infringement shall have their account terminated, if so ordered by that court.”

    Can someone tell me how that DOESN’T fully and completely comply with section 92A without infringing on our rights?

    It seems to me that the REAL problem is NOT section 92A which is essentially meaningless. No the REAL problem is the bullsh*t code of practive the ISP organisation is creating to “comply” with this law.

    How is it that a single sentence in an act requires a 33 page policy? My policy is also one sentence, and I defy anyone to show that it does not comply with 92A.

    Don’t believe the lies. This is not a law that is wrong, it is a stealth move by the ISP’s to start banning heavy data users.

    Count on it. Even if section 92A is repealed tomorrow, you can bet this code of practice will remain.

    Comment by Simon Rika — 19 February 2009 @ 1:36 pm

  2. Simon

    If ISPs do not accede to the demands of roghtholders under this law they are open to being sued by the rightsholder organisations, as is happening to iiNet in Australia. (iiNet always used to refer complaints from rightsholders to the police, apparently that’s not good enough for them.) So, on receipt of a complaint the ISP has to decide either to tough it out and risk being sued, or just cut off the account. Doing the latter is a lot cheaper and lower risk. TelstraClear has already said that’s exactly what it will do to web-hosted content which is complained about, under section 92c.

    I disagree with your point that ISPs are looking to cut people off. They all have terms and conditions that say they can do that anyway. Why would you turn away paying customers if you don’t have to?

    Colin

    Comment by colin — 19 February 2009 @ 4:45 pm

  3. “If ISPs do not accede to the demands of roghtholders under this law they are open to being sued by the rightsholder organisations”

    Sorry Colin but that is a load of bull.

    This law makes no difference in that respect, because ISP’s have ALWAYS been open to being sued by rights holders! As is anyone else. That is what the courts are for!

    “So, on receipt of a complaint the ISP has to decide either to tough it out and risk being sued, or just cut off the account.”

    Ok, show me the wording in that law that says that.

    I showed you mine, you show me yours.

    “TelstraClear has already said that’s exactly what it will do to web-hosted content which is complained about, under section 92c.”

    Bull. Go to their terms and conditions:

    http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/company-info/terms-and-conditions/internet-services.cfm

    And you will find:

    “We may stop or suspend a particular internet service or cancel this whole agreement at any time without telling you if:

    * you do not pay for any of our internet services by the due date shown on your bill;
    * you give us incorrect information;
    * you have not given us a deposit we have asked for; or
    * we consider that you have not complied with these terms and conditions, including your obligations under paragraph 4.

    Para. 4 includes:

    “# use the internet services in a reasonable and responsible manner and in accordance with our Acceptable Use Policy (which is available at http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/go/acceptableuse);
    # only use the internet services for the purposes that they are provided for;
    # not use the internet services in any way that is unlawful (including under any law passed after the date of this agreement) or offensive or could interfere with our network, any other operator’s network or with another customer’s enjoyment of our services;
    # not use the internet services to publish or distribute any information, software or other material which is unlawful or which a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive or defamatory (flaming); ”

    So the current terms and conditions already say that telstra clear reserves the right to terminate your connection for any reason, including copyright violation! Section 92A had NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. Every other ISP has similar wording in their terms and conditions and always have.

    “I disagree with your point that ISPs are looking to cut people off. They all have terms and conditions that say they can do that anyway. Why would you turn away paying customers if you don’t have to?”

    Ok, so you admit that the ISP’s already reserve the right to do what they are now saying they are being forced to do by the government.

    If that is the case, why are they supposedly so against the law? It is a con. They are trying to pin the blame on the government for what THEY want to do!

    As to why they would want to turn away paying customers, the answer is incredibly obvious.

    If you pay 30 dollars a month and download 1GB, and I pay 50 dollars a month and download 100GB, who do they make the most PROFIT from?
    Its not ME thats for sure… So guess who will suddenly receive violation notices?

    The fact is, internet in New Zealand is incredibly underfunded. Telescum and their ilk have been RIPPING US OFF for years, and now, rather than spending the money to give us REAL high speed internet, they intend to cut demand! They just don’t want to take the rap for it, and are blaming the govt instead.

    Comment by Simon Rika — 19 February 2009 @ 7:06 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress