As for copyright, the multitude of views shows there are different perspectives and interests, including the public interest.

What is a bit galling is the attitude that if you can do something, it is ok to do it. Some of you are saying “so what” if I steal a few MP3s or movies. If you try to stop me, I will go stealth. Um, isn’t that what all thieves do? They are much more effective if they can hide what they do.

Clare’s suggestion of charging ISPs is an attempt to make the thieves actually pay for what they take. We can argue about how that money should be distributed, but the point is that Clare wants to coerce the thieves into becoming paying customers and compensate the copyright holders.

It is akin to the shop owner making everyone pay a fee upon entering the store to make up for the thieves that cannot be caught. It functions like insurance. Everyone who pays for things legitimately pays a higher price than they otherwise would but for the thieves.

You know, I think about that when I pay those high prices for a digital mp3 or a movie. If everyone paid their fair share, I would be paying less. In that sense, all the thieves are not stealing from the publishers or artists, they are stealing from people like me!

Not only are they stealing from other customers, but they also cheat the government out of GST. That hurts everyone. Either you are paying a higher tax because of it, or you are getting fewer services and benefits.

The big issue for me is how to create an Internet analogy for libraries. How can you find a way to lend things for free or at a low cost without it being stealing? Do the digital libraries need to be registered with the government or have non-profit status? Is a torrent a library equivalent? What about the issue of returning something to such a library. In real libraries, you have to return what you borrow, and you only get to keep it a few weeks. And if you don’t return it, you have to pay the library to get a new one. And guess what, the library will use that money to buy a replacement. It won’t steal from a bookstore or another library.

The people who steal this material want to be considered legitimate users. They want to be like library patrons. If that is the case, they should set up systems that function like libraries do, not like digital clearinghouses of “hot” goods, as things are now.

What does one do?

If I own a business and play music for my customers, APRA demands a fee to support local music. What happens if I only play music by overseas artists (who wouldn’t see one cent of monies collected), OR another scenario I put. It could be more likely in my case I’d pick a channel from my my local music radio station for customers to listen to. Does APRA still want a FEE? Certainly wouldn’t be thinking of paying if that was case. APRA in my eyes would be then double dipping.

Nothing like other copyright issues to keep this debate alive.

Cheers all.

The MAFIAA have been using the same tactics for decades to slow the introduction of new technologies until they are able to own it(NAPSTER,AND NOW kAZAA).If everything they’ve threatend would happen has never come to fruition(t.v,v.c.r,dvd,killing their business model)then why would anyone listen to the same lies yet again??.Sharing for personal use is not theft and no law will convince me differently,the artists get free advertising,the isp makes a truckload of cash($250 a month from me),the government gets their tax too.

If you try and catch me i will use vpn,proxies or whatever method i have to stay under the radar,even if i have to pay for that service.If you are smart enough to catch me then good luck.But i would rather spend time in jail than pay the MAFIAA scum or NZFACT 1 freakin CENT.

“We should enable people to access the information/material they seek. And consider introducing a licensing fee attached to internet service provider (ISP) connections.”

I agree on the first point in this quote that people should have access to the internet… and some would consider it a disadvantage if someone did not have access to this resource.

The proposed solution of introducing a licensing fee for ISP connections would no doubt be passed on to the consumer. I’m not sure how much this levy cost but if the cost contributes toward deterring those on a lower income from obtaining internet access then this would be a problem.

ie your media players should track what you listen to, and collect which tracks/artists you listen to most. This information can let you know who gets your dollar for listening to music this month – perhaps no-one if you are just re-listening to old music you’ve already paid for. This could be capped monthly, and divided proportionally among the artists you’ve listened to by how much you listened to them. Once an artist has been fully paid for a track/album you no longer have to pay them for listening to that track/album.

This is difficult to calculate, except for new digital devices or media players which could conform to this honour system. So long as your digital library is properly tagged, information about the labels which take money for the artists should be available. Private agents could be nominated to accept payments for groups of labels, or labels could co-operate to simplify payments – without need for a centrally run authority.