Comments on: ACTA, secrecy, Copyright and delays

By: Spud

Spud — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 04:22:36 +0000

How dare they invade our privacy! That is sick

By: n0exit

n0exit — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 04:17:46 +0000

So they released the new version today but what I want to know is how are copyright holders going to find out who is infringing without breaching the privacy act??? http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/3167690/Govt-reveals-revamped-Section-92A

By: n0exit

n0exit — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:26:01 +0000

Sorry, I forgot to add that telephone companies rarly cut off Prank callers. You usually get charged extra (i think it’s $5 for calling 111 and hanging up) or they block you from calling that number. Telephone companies do not have to find these people and there is proof available to show that the calls have been made. The previouse version of section 92a was suggesting that a complaint from the copyright holder should warrant a warning and 3 warnings should warrant a disconnection. However there was no proof required and. The difference is that the telephone company can see that a caller is harrasing someone else but ISP’s can’t be sure if the user has breached copyright so they shouldn’t be cutting off peoples connections.

By: n0exit

n0exit — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:16:47 +0000

GWW- nowhere in the telecommunication act 2001 does it say misuse a phone and you will be cut off. In fact you can only be sent to prison for up to 3 months or be fined a maximum of $2000. However, it is not the telcommunication provider’s responsibility to find and prosecute people who misuse a telephone. It is the victim who must do this. In the same way it is not the ISP’s job to find every copyright infringer and tell the copyright holder, it is the copyright holder’s job. Copyright holders can prosecute infringers under the copyright act. To answer your question; there should be no difference.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:15:14 +0000

Excuse me, but how does this protect the interest of New Zealanders? Just who is our government working for?

This is going to unnecessarily alienate thousands of New Zealanders. If National is trying to infuriate young voters, it is succeeding.

I would let off some steam, and become politically apathetic again by riding my motorcycle. Unfortunately it seems I can no longer afford this.

This is the kind of government that creates new politicians…

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:00:36 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by redalertblog: New post, “ACTA, secrecy, Copyright and delays” – http://ow.ly/MwgZ…

By: Spud

Spud — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:49:25 +0000

It would burned ISPs and for places of work and universities it would be a disaster.

By: ghostwhowalksnz

ghostwhowalksnz — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:46:53 +0000

Misuse the voice phone and you are cut off.

From the Telecommunications Act 2001
Every person commits an offence who, in using a telephone device, uses profane, indecent, or obscene language, or makes a suggestion of a profane, indecent, or obscene nature, with the intention of offending the recipient.
2. Every person commits an offence who-
a. uses, or causes or permits to be used, any telephone device for the purpose of disturbing, annoying, or irritating any person, whether by calling up without speech or by wantonly or maliciously transmitting communications or sounds, with the intention of offending the recipient; or
b. in using a telecommunications device, knowingly gives any fictitious order, instruction, or message.

Yes there is an actual crime which can be prosecuted but the phone companies can act for minor cases

Whats the difference?

By: Spud

Spud — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:37:34 +0000

I hate to think what plan they’ve come up with. It better not involve ISPs.

By: Vik Olliver

Vik Olliver — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:09:50 +0000

Nothing announced. Not even NZ’s negotiating position. All smoke & mirrors so far.

Probably because, as one US official[1] put it, “The reason we can’t make it public is people would walk away from the table”

Vik ;v)

[1] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/12/feds-fear-acta-scrutiny/