Writings on technology and society from Wellington, New Zealand

Monday, February 23, 2009

Democracy in action

The government has just announced that it will delay S92a until at least the 27th of March, and will suspend it in any case until the Internet people and the copyright holders can agree. That’s fantastic, and victory for common sense.

Well done, everyone who has worked to get rid of this dreadful law! Special mentions go to Bronwyn and Matthew from the CFF and Nat Torkington from Foo. But most of all thanks to you – if you blacked out your avatar, or blogged about it, or wrote to an MP – good on you. You made a difference.


posted by colin at 5:20 pm  


  1. You have bought it hook line and sinker.

    Now ask yourself, now that the law is “gone” (which it isn’t) will the TCF now abandon THEIR POLICY they have been making?

    If you think that, you are an idiot.

    The law was nothing but a smokescreen. Now that “we the people” think the government is behind these policies, the ISP’s can do whatever they want and blame the government. You can be damned sure, law or no law, the TCF will NOT abandon or water down their policy. THEY want it, no matter how much bullshit they spread to the contrary.

    Comment by Simon Rika — 26 February 2009 @ 11:11 am

  2. Don’t believe this is a set up?

    ““Recent discussions between the TCF and copyright holders about the content and operation of the Code have been constructive, and it seems likely that we will be able to reach an agreement on all outstanding matters in the near future,” Mr Chivers said.”

    If there was a LAW that REQUIRED certain acts, why would TCF be NEGOTIATING with Copyright Holders? The government doesnt even get a mention.

    Do Copyright holders make and enforce our laws now? Why is the government not involved in these “negotiations”?

    Because its all a con!

    Comment by Simon Rika — 26 February 2009 @ 11:23 am

  3. Simon

    If I’ve been conned so has the rest of the country from the Prime Minister down. He says the act is draconian and pretty ropey. His words – check one of my previous posts for the link if you need it. I won’t go through the criticism from everyone else again but there is plenty more of it to be found from a wide range of people.

    So, either we are all deluded, or the Act really does imply what we have said all along and that is why it has been suspended.


    Comment by colin — 26 February 2009 @ 3:09 pm

  4. Simon,
    The piece of the puzzle you are missing is that government *arranged* for the ISPs and the copyright lobby to work together. Your conspiracy theories are getting tiresome. The ISPs do not want s92A, as it requires much more work from them that they will have difficulty doing and will cost them a lot of money to do even half well. If you want to rave at someone, go rant at the TCF.

    Comment by Mark Harris — 26 February 2009 @ 3:15 pm

  5. “So, either we are all deluded, or the Act really does imply what we have said all along and that is why it has been suspended.”

    OK, so certain politicians and corporate types tell you something, and you believe it without even checking?


    Why can’t or won’t people like you do that?

    The only thing I see in the law is that a policy must be made (doesn’t say enforced) that disconnects repeat infringers IN APPROPRIATE CIRCUMSTANCES. There is no definition of what is appropriate, no defined punishment for failure to comply, NOTHING THAT FORCES AN ISP TO DISCONNECT PEOPLE ON ACCUSATION ALONE!

    So why do YOU and the ISP’s and the CORPORATE media keep saying there is?

    This is a bullshit meaningless law that can not and will not ever be enforced BUT it gives ISP’s and IP holder’s the smokescreen they desire. With people like you helping them, they are blaming the government rather than the REAL scoundrels here – THE ISP’S.

    Comment by Simon Rika — 10 March 2009 @ 10:12 am

  6. PPS

    Here is a link to the TCF homepage.

    Go there and find ANYTHING that the ISP’s said about this act PRIOR to it being enacted. In fact try and find anything that says the ISP’s disagree with it.

    If the ISP’S were so concerned about it why did the TCF not make any submissions BEFORE the act was amended?

    In fact the first mention I can find is the TCF starting work on the code, and not until MONTHS later does the TCF issue a press release with their “concerns” in fact they released it just before the law came into effect! Funny that.

    Also note that the TCF previously made a “Disconnection Code Of Practice” that says:

    “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 it seems they were doing this BEFORE the law came along. Funny that.

    Comment by Simon Rika — 10 March 2009 @ 11:12 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress