Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

February 24, 2010 -

A New Zealand anti-piracy measure that includes a “three-strikes” plan of attack against copyright infringers was introduced to Parliament yesterday.

The Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill (PDF), detailed earlier here, proposes an amendment to the Copyright Act of 1994 by repealing section 92A, which would have allowed the termination of infringer’s ISP accounts with no court action.

The new legislation would require ISP’s to provide three warnings to infringers before copyright holders are able to bring the matter before a Copyright Tribunal, which would have the power fine an infringer up to $15,000. Copyright owners will also have the ability to request that a District Court terminate an infringer’s ISP account for up to six months.

The bill’s main backer, Commerce Minister Simon Power, said that the legislation “… puts in place a fair and balanced process to deal with online copyright infringements occurring via file sharing.” He added, “It's important that account holders are given a reasonable time to stop infringing before enforcement takes place.”

In a Q&A it was stated that, before suspension, “The Bill requires a court to consider factors like the account holder's reliance on access to the Internet.”

Power hopes that the bill can be passed into law sometime this year.

Jordan Carter of the non-profit group InternetNZ backed the measure, but expressed concern to PC World over the possible suspension of ISP accounts:

The only major flaw remaining in the legislation is its provision for the suspension of people’s internet accounts. Internet users would simply start a new account at another ISP. While suspension would require an order of the District Court, it is still unworkable and unnecessary. InternetNZ will argue strongly that suspension be deleted by the Select Committee.


Comments

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Whine, whine, whine. If you cunts just stopped pirating, laws like this wouldn't be neccessarry.


-- teh moominz --

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Says the guy who no doubts pirates all the time but refuses to admit it. I don't endorce piracy, but I won't calll you a "cunt" for doing it, so keep the language civil, would you please?

Did you know that many people have pirated goods in their home? Some completely unaware that they do? It's not that hard to get a friend to burn some songs to a CD for you without realising they didn't actually pay for those songs.

Next up we have the fact that most people pirate not because they don't want to pay but because they can't. Some people even like that "try before you buy" thing and many people who download albums, movies and games actually end up buying them when they find out they actually like them.

People will continue to pirate for various reasons, most of this being cost-related. It's far cheaper for someone (in New Zealand) to buy a 10-20gb block of data allowance and then go and download games with it. Up to 5x cheaper, in fact. I have paid for video games for years but the prices are just going higher and higher and publishers CANNOT justify why I'm paying $150 for a PC game but America is paying $60. No, "shipping costs" is a load of bull.

Publishers need to learn that. If video games cost half of what they do now then yes, people may make less off of one game but they will make more overall. More people will be able to afford games and more people will buy them. Raising the prices to get more money will lead you to making nothing because eventually, we'll all be broke because we can barely afford the groceries let alone a video game (do you know how much it costs for a bottle of milk in NZ, no really, do you? IT'S INSANE!).

I don't think this law for change anything really. It's flawed from the start yes but it doesn't really change much. People could frame us before such a law exists and people can frame us afterwards. What's the difference?

-- Randi Tastix

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

What about people that torrent from publics areas? When I torrent things, I use a random unsecured wireless router nearby (there are several), so how can you *prove* that the homeowner/ISP owner was the one that actually did the downloading?

The standard of proof is basically nonexistent, hence why I disagree with this particular law. Good in theory, but it just won't work in the end.

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Uh, I don't like the idea that my ISP is monitor what I do or don't download in any form at all. I am paying them to open the doors for my electronics, not for them to screen what goes in our out.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

The three strikes solution is destin to fail from the start.

Let me pose a common situation that could arise: Work from home Dad... wait for it... works from home. Money is tight, he's working too much as a day trader and has let his parental duties of monitoring the kids internet usage lapse because times are tough, and the boss is really riding him for results. Dad's son little Timmy is in to music, loads up Azureus/Vuze and starts downloading from public bittorrent trackers. Oops! Little Timmy downloaded from a tainted RIAA tracker and now the RIAA wants to shut off the internet connection or force the family to pay a "Bazillion badollars." The RIAA makes the ISP shut the family internet connection down and now Dad, the bread winner for the family, is out of work. Now the family sells the house, car, and possibly little Timmy to make ends meet, all because the ISP played "rent a cop" for the RIAA.

Just can't work. The multiperson household screws this RIAA/ISP plan up. Why are the others in the househole forced to have no ISP because little Timmy is an idiot?

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

A) Parents are responsible for the actions of their children, it's always been this way. a 2 year old breaks something in a store, either all's forgiven (if they're nice) or the parent pays for it.

B) It's probably assumed (and correctly so i think) that after the first offence that the child would be corrected/punished for his actions and made to understood that can not be done.

You are responsible for what your pc is used for, any place i've been to that requires a log on or sign up for computer use had made this extreamly clear.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

I agree actually with what you are saying in principle, but the truth is just as I said. If Dad's work pressures are taking over his ability to parent, he's going to miss a few of Little Timmys transgressions. Now Dad can't work because the ISP shuts him off? If the ISP does too many of these... then their own profits suffer eventually as well.

100% bad idea any way you look at it IMO.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

well keep in mind it has been stated that reliance on internet access for such things will be taken in to account when deciding actual punishment.

And the transgressions can't possible be missed as long as proper action is taken to notify after the first 2 strikes, unless timmy manages to sabotage all attempts and destroyes the notification.

Otherwise, yes your described situation sucks, but parental responsability has always been in effect regardless of how unaware or ignorant the parent has been to the childs actions.

You can't really knock a system because of a nasty part of parental responsability that has existed for almost as long as society has.

..well, i guess you can (and it's your every right to) but i think either way options like these tend to be, if anything, the lesser of the evils. Would it be nice to have a system in the future where your event would never be an issue? yes it would, but for the present, it strikes me as the best method so far.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Seems reasonable, sure there are a lot of things that need to be worked out, such as the ability to just go to another ISP or something, but overall i think the general 3 strike frame work system could really do something.

I mean, if you are stupid enough to do it and get caught 3 times, the first two incidents resulting in a clear warning of what will happen if caught again, chances are 6 months without you on the internet will increase the overall intelligence of the internet. It'll still be the kind of IQ you need a shovel to get too, but i'll take it.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Anyone can make a complaint with no verification

Anyone with a small amount of skill can set up something that will generate connections to random torrent trackers (which then generate false positives (then again they dont even try to verify the connections or downloaders)

There will be no standard of proof for the evidence leading to these complaints nor any repurcussion for false ones (see the DMCA and forced implementations of it)

How is this a good thing again?
 

the first place that will have 3 reports submitted against will be the politicians homes and offices that vote for this bill

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

"How is this a good thing again?"

It isn't.

I've been hit with a 'false positive' DMCA claim before. How do you even fight that crap when your ISP sends it to you in a form e-mail with no ability to respond? When they don't tell you who is making the claim? Or whether the person making the claim is even the legitimate copyright holder?

This is so ready for abuse it's not even funny.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

So, how long before someone finds a way to bypass it?

And under what conditions do they determien copyright infringement is taking place?

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

Bypass it? You mean with things like encryption, VPNs, proxies, decentralised file sharing, etc? We're largely there today and the harder governments crack down, the more robust the options will become. They can't outlaw encryption because it's essential for business purposes, and even if they did people would start resorting to stenography or other methods instead.

This is the kind of law that comes from people who don't understand at a technical level how the internet and computers work. ISPs tend to be against such laws and with good reason. They actually understand why it will never work.

I don't advocate copyright violation, but this isn't a war that can be won. I'd rather my tax dollars were spent in other areas where we can get real tangible benefits. I live in NZ too B.T.W so it really is my tax dollars in this case.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

"The only major flaw remaining in the legislation is its provision for the suspension of people’s internet accounts. Internet users would simply start a new account at another ISP."

Already happened, right in the article.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Kiwi Three-Strikes Bill Introduced

I like the general idea of laws like these but I've yet to see an implementation that will actually work.

 

Andrew Eisen

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Poll: Is it censorship when a private retailer decides not to sell a particular video game?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBWlnL6Tr6k part 2 of the witcher history05/28/2015 - 10:54am
Infophile@Wonderkarp. Yeah, that's ads. Some advertisers use a trick to open up an appstore address, which forces the phone to shift over to it. I wish providers would be more diligent about it, even if all they can do is punish offenders after it happens05/28/2015 - 10:33am
MechaCrashFor all your wounded pearl clutching and HOW DARE YOUing, you're sure quick to resort to schoolyard insults like the petulant child you are.05/28/2015 - 10:25am
MechaCrashI wasn't even trying to offend you. I just didn't care if I did, because you're a thin skinned hypocrite who routinely argues in bad faith.05/28/2015 - 10:23am
MechaCrashYeah, smearing everyone with a broad brush is your schtick. And also, I hate you.05/28/2015 - 10:22am
WonderkarpFudge, for some reason sometimes when I access Gamepolitics on my phone, it shoots me over too my app store. I think its the Ads05/28/2015 - 9:58am
WonderkarpI'm not perpetually offended. I'm an regular viewer of South Park. I have a problem with people saying gamergaters are school shooters. That and lets be honest. I dont like MechaRash05/28/2015 - 9:55am
Ivresse@MechaCrash: I'd like to refer you to the words of Stephen Fry: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGA3QGHW8AARsax.jpg05/28/2015 - 9:43am
Wonderkarpalright Fudge05/28/2015 - 9:27am
MechaCrashWhat good is being one of the perpetually offended if you don't make sure everybody sees just how offended you are?05/28/2015 - 9:02am
james_fudgeYou two can reasonably slug it out in the article in question if you want :)05/28/2015 - 8:59am
MechaCrashI wasn't expecting you to drag it into the shoutbox, either. Just when I think I have you pegged, you prove me only MOSTLY right.05/28/2015 - 8:55am
MechaCrashWhat argument? You made a joke in bad taste. I made a response joke in similar bad taste. And you are going berserk with...okay, not the flavor of HOW DARE YOU I was expecting (I thought you'd No True Scotsman, instead you dodged it entirely).05/28/2015 - 8:52am
Wonderkarpfyi, thats a self made "REDACTED" to make Mr Fudges life a little easier.05/28/2015 - 8:50am
Wonderkarphow is calling somebody out for being a [REDACTED] throwing a Tantrum? Is it cause you cant dispute my argument?05/28/2015 - 8:46am
MechaCrash"Grow a thicker skin," says the person throwing a tantrum that's filling the shoutbox.05/28/2015 - 8:40am
Wonderkarpbeen a bombing had Sarkeesian spoke, because there would be an increase police presence and nobody is THAT STUPID to make a threat like that and follow through. This isnt the movies05/28/2015 - 8:35am
WonderkarpIts what you make of them. GamerGate in DC had a bomb threat. Police were there, but GG continued to enjoy themselves and have a good time. Bomb Threats in general, you give them to the police and continue your business. I guarantee there wouldnt have05/28/2015 - 8:34am
MechaCrashhttp://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58521856-78/sarkeesian-usu-video-feminist.html.csp Remember the talk Sarkeesian had to cancel because of death threats? Yeah. That's the thing I'm talking about.05/28/2015 - 8:30am
WonderkarpI'm not defending Bomb Threats. They are idiotic and have no place in society, but as somebody who lived through several bomb threats I can tell you they are weak05/28/2015 - 8:29am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician