coffee.geek.nz

ACTA is that inglorious treaty New Zealand is negotiating with the USA, that has been deemed a "National Security" secret, and involves stopping fake Prada handbags, as well as taking away our rights online.

Recent ACTA leaks include this juicy piece of shitting on ISPs:

ISPs to be liable under civil law for content uploaded and/or downloaded
by subscribers, unless they agree to terminate service to "repeat offenders".

This is sometimes called "Safe Harbour", meaning a set of actions an ISP must do to be safe from liability -- It's also the same smelly stuff that was in Section 92A of New Zealand's Copyright act. We managed to stop Section92A, but ACTA is the same thing dressed up as a treaty.

"Repeat Offenders" could mean only those convicted in a fair trial -- but even then, I am greatly opposed to ever laying the blame for copyright infringement on an ISP. Other than being unfair, it is another cost they'll need to pass onto all customers. It sounds very much like once again requiring ISPs to judge the merits of an accusation against one of their customers, with the implication that ISPs are required to spy on their users in order to gather evidence to verify or disprove accusations against their customers.

I say: If you break copyright law, you are the blame, and you should face the consequences. We all need to stop aiming legislation at the ISPs. The ISPs should never be liable for the actions of others.

ACTA resembles a poonami for the Internet. I just learned that word; ask a parent if you don't know what it means ;-)

Computerworld > NZ’s S92A failure linked to Aussie ISP copyright case

While New Zealand’s government, internet service provider industry and copyright owners contemplate their next move following the withdrawal of Section 92A of the Copyright Act, a legal action currently awaiting hearing in the Australian Federal courts is set to revolve around a strikingly similar p...

NBR reports

Prime Minister John Key has announced that the government will throw out the controversial Section 92A of the Copyright Amendment (New Technologies) Act and start again.

With only four days until the Guilt Upon Accusation law, Section 92A of the Copyright Act, is due to come into force the Creative Freedom Foundation (CFF) are highlighting statistics that paint a picture of what New Zealanders may face if the Government allows this law.

Statistics emerge around the Guilt Upon Accusation Law.. With only four days until the Guilt Upon Accusation law, Section 92A of the Copyright Act, is due to come into force the Creative Freedom Foundation (CFF) are highlighting statistics that paint a picture of what New Zealanders may face if the Government allows this law.

S92A was championed by former Labour MP Judith Tizard as a law that would cut off the internet of those "who might be breaking the law" without any due process – effectively removing New Zealander's fundamental right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty. Prime Minister John Key has aptly called this law "draconian".

Hide To Seek Repeal Of Copyright Law - Press Release: ACT New ZealandSource: scoop.co.nzACT Leader Rodney Hide said today he supports repeal of controversial section 92A of the Copyright Act and will be taking a proposal to the Ministers responsible to have the law changed.

Mr Hide says, "It's a stupid law imposed by Labour. My view is that Section 92A is fundamentally flawed becaus...

Child porn threat used to push S92A | computerworld.co.nzSource: computerworld.co.nzWaikato University's weekly Student Union magazine Nexus reports that United Video and other video rental stores in Hamilton are using the threat of child pornography to get customers to sign a petition in favour of Section 92A of New Zealand's new copyright law.

Amusing observation by Simon Power at question time today:

I find the Labour Party’s position on this issue rather confusing. The member wants to keep section 92A but amend it; the former Minister, Judith Tizard, said that it should come into force as it is, explaining that it was left deliberately vague as “at no stage did I think … I had the answer to the process”; and the Labour candidate for Hunua, Mr Jordan Carter, is the contact for yesterday’s press release from InternetNZ that said that section 92A should be dumped. Maybe Labour needs its own code of practice.

There's a law that affect 4 groups: ISPs, copyright holders, artists/content creators, and internet users

So, here in New Zealand we found a subset of a group called "telcos" who are a subset of the ISP group

and a subset of the copy rights holder group (some of our entertainment industry)

and ignore the internet user group

and ignore the artist/content creators

and .... if that tiny subset of a subset of a subset of a subset can agree on *something* then section 92A will go into affect on 27th of March 2009.

This is how laws are made in New Zealand.

Computerworld > Breaking: TelstraClear bails from copyright code talksSource: computerworld.co.nz

TelstraClear has pulled the rug from under efforts to implement New Zealand's controversial new copyright law.

The telco has told the Telecommunications Carriers' Forum (TCF) and a working party trying to thrash out a draft code to implement section 92A of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act that it no longer supports the effort.

Editorial: Copy right | New Zealand ListenerSource: www.listener.co.nzThe outcry over Section 92a (1) – hastily re-inserted against select committee advice – has come primarily from bloggers. One of their objections is the apparent ease with which they fear their internet accounts could be terminated simply because they are accused of breaching copyright – without hav...    There goes that "19/20" statistic being misquoted. The actual study determine that 19/20 downloads are unauthorized.

It did not find that 19/20 songs are downloaded illegally,
It did not find that 19/20 people are downloading illegally.

It did find that 18% of those surveyed (Europeans) are sharing music illegally, so you can conclude that those 18% are sharing *LOT*

The actual study is at
http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_resources/dmr2009.html

I recommend skipping to page 2 where it describes how illegal sharing has decreased and profits have increased (25%!) with the slight business model change of selling music online.
    

Section 92A has an impact of every internet user in New Zealand - but 92C is worse.

The ISP/webhost is strongly encouraged by this law to take down the website of any customer accused of copyright infringement.

92C requires a webhost to not only become a judge & court, but also the ISP/webhost is liable if they decide "not guilty" and a real court later decides they were gulity.

It takes a really brave ISP/Webhost to say "not guilty".

92C is clearer than 92A, swifter to punish, and there is no code of practise (not even a draft) to protect those that are accused but are not guilty.

New Zealand Lawyer Web Site > Current Issue > Issue 106 > F2

A serious implication of the termination policy obligation in section 92A is that it ultimately requires ISPs to police copyright infringement and enforce rights on behalf of copyright holders by cutting off users’ Internet accounts. One factor that exacerbates these concerns is the broad definition...    

from NZLawyer Magazine this bit is a good summary of why there are so many NZers protesting against this law

Section 92A effectively imposes the work of a court on the shoulders of a commercial – or in many cases, private – entity. ISPs will be required to both make a judgement and carry out the sentence. Within the draft Code, there is also some discretion granted to an ISP in evaluating evidence and determining copyright infringement.

Although the rights of copyright holders may be preserved under the ISP liability regime, it is arguable that some of this is at the expense of the rights and freedoms of others. Users are uncomfortable with the potential for the unqualified termination of users’ accounts by ISPs who fear falling short of the legislative threshold of termination for “repeated infringement”. Of equal concern is the ability for copyright holders to further limit the legitimate “fair use” of copyrighted works by Internet users.    

From computerworld.co.nz

A local website has removed recordings of the Conan novels under the threat of legal action from the US, despite the material being in the public domain in New Zealand.

New Zealand-based audio enthusiast website BrokenSea Audio ran into trouble with the copyright holders of Robert E. Howard characters and stories, primarily the stories about Conan the Barbarian, created by the Texan writer in the 1930s.

The material in question is in the public domain, the threat of "one accusation and you're taken down" has caused a host removecontent voluntarily, even though the content is in public domain and they have every right to distribute it.

BrokenSea decided to comply with the demands. All Conan audio dramas and audio books produced by its volunteers have been removed from the website, and a major project — a production of Howard's only full length Conan novel, Hour Of The Dragon, which Mannering had adapted into a full cast audio drama script — has been cancelled.

Under New Zealand copyright law, if a website is accused of copyright infringement, the webhost must take down the content. If the webhost does not, they could be liable for any copyright infringement, even though it isn't their actions that cause the content to be there.

This is in section 92C of our copyright (new technologies) amendment act.

Slavka Antonova : 'Fear' of web factor in proposal to change Copyright Act - Technology - NZ Herald Source: www.nzherald.co.nzIn that respect, Section 92A is a product of both "fashion" and fear - the fear of the open ethos of the internet that favours sharing of content, ideas and innovations.

Nat Torkington is at post cabinet meeting press conference and reports that section 92a is delayed until 29th March.

If no agreement, will suspend.

That's pretty much all the info you can put in a tweet.

From @gnat:

announced delay in impl until 29th mar. if no agreement, will suspend. #blackout

even if agreement reached, govt to monitor first six months & review #blackout

asked why hiatus rather than abolish? both parties say close to agreement #blackout

why cop instead of good legislation? lot of steps, diff poss, too much for legisln #blackout

do you share objectors views? both sides have merit. not wild west but diff from newsp. give and take on both sides. #blackout

mentioned FTA. answered q: not blacked out face book page. #blackout

pm questioning why it was added after taken out. his view is that voluntary COP indicates they're happy. #blackout

indicated nats had chance to rethink their support of 92. #blackout

sorry, voluntery COP agrred to by both parties would indicate that it's okay law. disagreement ... #blackout

Computerworld were the first to publish
http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/86D681292534A2CCCC25756600143FD1

...the government may suspend the controversial S92a if no agreement is reached between the parties on how to implement it.

New Zealand Goes All Black Against Three Strikes | Electronic Frontier FoundationSource: www.eff.orgWhether you're following a New Zealander on Twitter, or have friended a Kiwi on Facebook, you will not have missed Net users from that country protesting Section 92A in NZ's new Copyright Act. Thousands are turning their sites and their icons black to mourn the coming enforcement of the provision, w...

The Creative Freedom Foundation has teamed up with Mike Corb and Luke Rowell / Disasteradio to produce the Guilt Upon Accusation anthem: The Copywrong Song.

The song is part of a week of action, launched by the Foundation, against Guilt Upon Accusation laws in NZ. The campaign, taking place from 16-23 February, is a reaction to Section 92A of the Copyright Amendment Act due to come into effect in NZ on February 28, and has already seen thousands of people, organisations, and major companies "blackout" their websites, blogs, FaceBook, MySpace, Twitter and Bebo accounts to show their opposition to the law.

Lyrics: Matt Hunt, Mike Corb, Bronwyn Holloway-Smith, Luke Rowell/Disasteradio
Music: Mike Corb
Produced by: Luke Rowell/Disasteradio
Vocals, guitar, guitar synth: Mike Corb
Synths and programming: Luke Rowell/Disasteradio

DOWNLOAD THE MP3
Info on the Remix Challenge

Quoting Elpie

For those reading this from outside of New Zealand...

This is NOT a local, New Zealand-only issue. When any government enacts laws such as this other governments use it as an example to follow. If NZ does not repeal S.92A and S.92C, or put them on hold to revisit, its only a matter of time before your governments start using New Zealand as an example.

Other countries have refused to go this route - so far - but many will be watching and waiting to see what happens in NZ. It will be so easy for the mega music and movie moguls to release (unsubstantiated) figures to show that S.92A is working in NZ - then watch as your rights go the same way as New Zealanders rights.

We live in a connected world. Please show your support for this protest. Your country could be next!

#blackout is now a top trending term on http://twitter.com

From Stephen Fry:

http://twitter.com/stephenfry/status/1213861623
Thoughtcrime in NZ. Make you weep. I HATE pipline throttling in the name of (c) protection. cf comcast.

From Leo Laporte:

http://twitter.com/LeoLaporte/status/1214144033
Blacked-out avatar coming up. If it can happen in NZ it can happen in the US.

Prominent NZers galore have joined the blackout

So have telcos:

@vodafonenz joined early this morning before it was even cool.

http://twitter.com/vodafoneNZ/status/1213610639
blacked out to support opposition to section 92

@orcon joined, with the following statement:

http://twitter.com/Orcon/status/1214232835
Would like to point out that we do still support the intent of Section 92A

@telecomnz made a statement but didn't blackout their icon:

http://twitter.com/TelecomNZ/status/1214050384
We recognise the importance of protecting individuals' copyright. However we don't believe #s92 in its current form is the best solution

Stephen Fry backs campaign against 92ASource: www.netguide.co.nzNetGuide: making today’s world easy. NetGuide is New Zealand’s favourite technology web site, featuring the latest news, products, software downloads and useful how-to guides., Stephen Fry blacks out Twitter image in support of campaign against Copyright Act.

Join New Zealand Internet blackout protest against insane copyright lawSource: www.geekzone.co.nzReason didn't work and the Parliamentary process failed, which is why we in New Zealand now have arguably the world's harshest copyright enforcement law. Sections 92A and C of the amended Copyright Act ...

If you also wish to black out your avatar, in protest of "Guilt upon accusation" within New Zealand's new Copyright laws, you may use the attached black images.

(images released under WTFPL)

the law (section 92a) comes into effect on 28th February - it just needs the new cabinet ministers to sign it off.

This is the last week to "make some noise".

If you haven't written to your MP, or Steven Joyce (Minister for Communications) yet, then there is still time. A letter to either doesn't even need a stamp if posted in New Zealand.

Dunne: Repeal ‘guilt by accusation’ internet piracy law | United FutureSource: www.unitedfuture.org.nz“All of us who brought in this Act last year believed we were protecting artists from piracy and illegal downloads. However, it is now clear that we have a situation where internet users are vulnerable to the mere accusation of piracy, and that is simply neither fair nor just,” Mr Dunne said.

“In...    United Future declares that section 92a needs to be repealed and suggests a three to six month timespan to fix this draconian law    

Section 92A - what does it mean for you? - OrconSource: www.orcon.net.nzWe have been receiving a lot of questions from our customers about the new Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act, in particular the now infamous section 92A, which has some major implications for both New Zealand Internet users and copyright holders. ...    ORCON's info in new copyright laws - reads to me as if they'll be disconnecting customer apon a 4th accusation against them, whether or not that accusation was contested by the accused.    

Debate on section 92a, between Bronwyn Holloway-Smith (Creative Freedom Foundation), Ant Healey (APRA) and Technology Journalist, Pat Pilcher.

View streaming on demand from tvnz Episode 2, 5 Feb 2009 (in chapter 3).

Some snippets transcribed for the hearing+flashplayer impaired:

Moderator: Have you gone back to your members? because [Creative Freedom members include] APRA members who are really unhappy about this.
APRA:... We're a big organisation .. of 6,000 members, of course they will have divergent opinions. We are governed by a board of composers, a board of directors who are composers. We have clear instructions about posistion to take

(he didn't answer the question - did APRA consult their members or not?)

APRA: We must, we must not stand idly by and watch really core important rights simply be ignored
Moderator: But you've just had your best revenue year ever last year. You don't seem to be suffering from this.
APRA: well, we are. If you look at the revenue streams that revolve around the revenue from CD sales, a small part of which goes to the composer, of course we are. I could give you those figures and the figures would be decimated.

........ they've had their best revenue ever - but cd sales are down so this means we need to do something about the decimation of vinyl records magnetic tape CD sales.