Come on now Russell Fletcher aka redbaiter, think the issue through, the left are no longer in power in NZ so how can they have any legislative power over the internet ?

The first is that it’s harder to get access to copyrighted material legitimately than it is to get access to the same material illegitimately.

As an example, I purchased a DVD of a fairly recent movie on the weekend. I put it in to the DVD player, and it proceeded to play a “don’t steal this film” advert, followed by a bunch of adverts for other movies, before finally showing me the menu. The trailers were thankfully skippable. After this hassle, I could finally play the DVD in fantastic low-definition quality. Ofcourse, I can’t copy the thing onto my ipod without breaking a “technological protection mechanism”, nor can I copy it to other devices, such as my home theatre pc.

Compare this to the following:

1. Search for title of film.
2. Single click and it downloads.
3. A further click and I’m watching the actual movie in high definition. Subtitles are there if I want them, as are commentary tracks and so on.
4. A further click or two and I can copy this onto my ipod or wherever else I want.

If I could pay to do this second option, I would. As it is, I can’t. My only options are low resolution, DRM encrusted wastes of my time, or to obtain it elsewhere.

The second reason is that copyright has been extended so many times that most people completely see through the real use of it: When a song is copyrighted for 70+ years _after_ the death of the composer, it’s clear the function of copyright isn’t to enhance the public good. Rather, it’s there to provide an unending supply of funds for the copyright holder.

Cut the length of distribution rights back to something sane, make sure that copying for personal use, or for the purposes of parody or remixing are exempt and perhaps people will start respecting it again. Bring it back to the original intention: A limited monopoly on distribution, to encourage the creation of artistic works for the public good.

To say, “Oops” now, is too late, you’ve already lost credibility.

National is going back on their promises as well. The ICT debate transcript makes for compelling reading. I voted National because of the comments made by Maurice Williamson in that debate. I am not impressed with their behaviour in the area since the election.

How’s this for a copyright stake in the ground:

1) If I have access to the source material, I can copy it.
2) Copying is separate from Distribution.
3) I can store my copy for as long as I want.
4) I can make as many copies as I want.
5) I am allowed to modify my copies however I wish
(transcode/edit)
6) No special protection for any TPMs.

That is a good start for a customer-centric copyright legislation. The only problem is that it still makes kids violators by not allowing remix culture (distribution right is separate from copy right).

I don’t take Clare’s point to be at all about “getting anyone’s hands” on the internet. If anything I took her to be saying that we (all of us) need to get on with working out some answers to tough questions together. You’re the one who’s a) threadjacking and b) trying to spin this as a left/right issue. I happen to think it’s bigger than that.

Perhaps go and take your slogans back to Kiwiblog where they’re more likely to impress?

Oh, and Redbaiter, the good thing about free speech is it lets weirdos like you vent, and then we can all see the strange stuff you are made of…

I mean, absolute farces like this on mainstream TV are enough -

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv/2504098/Lack-of-balance-on-TVNZs-Breakfast

Been a long time since i have witnessed anything so close to fascism as that.

Imagine if those responsible for that decision were policing the net?

The left will use any pretext to attack freedom of political expression. I believe copyright is one of those pretexts.

Keep the left’s hands off the Internet.