RSS
 

tcf

209.85.175.132

209.85.175.132Source: 209.85.175.132Ko te putanga html tēnei o te kōnae http://www.tcf.org.nz/content/ebc0a1f5-6c04-48e5-9215-ef96d06898c0.cmr. Ka mahia aunoanoatia e G o o g l e he putanga html o ngā tuhinga i te wā ngōki i te tukutuku.    From Google's submission on TCF code practise

Section 92A puts users’ procedural and fundamental rights at risk, by threatening to terminate users’ Internet access based on mere allegations and reverse the burden of proof onto a user to establish there was no infringement. …

Copyright law is often complex and context sensitive, and only a court is qualified to adjudicate allegations of copyright infringement. Indeed, in Google’s experience, there are serious issues regarding the improper use and inaccuracy of copyright notices by rights holders. In this context, the responsibility should not fall to ISPs to determine cases of infringement.    

Computerworld > Breaking: TelstraClear bails from copyright code talks

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.

Public, Artists, and most ISPs not represented in Internet Policy — Creative Freedom Foundation (cre

Public, Artists, and most ISPs not represented in Internet Policy — Creative Freedom Foundation (creSource: creativefreedom.org.nzthis delay also calls for two non-Governmental groups to decide the future of New Zealander's access to the internet. The two groups – the Telecommunications Carriers Forum (TCF) and selected Rights Holders – have been asked to reach agreement on a S92A policy by March 27th. Although the TCF are cur...

The content of my TCF submission.

i'm going to put the final fullstop on my submission this weekend.

here's the portions i'm working on.

Education

The ongoing theme/goal of this debacle is "education" of Copyright Infringers. Many professional educators will tell you that you can't teach by saying "Don't do that" and expect someone to just stop.

For example, you can try telling a child to "Stop running" but you'll have much greater success if you tell the the child to "Walk, don't run." Instead of saying: "Stop eating with your hands", you ought to say "Use your knife and fork".

The same holds for "eduction notices". Don't say "Stop downloading Regina Spektor", but instead say "Go buy Regina Spektor's music on CDbaby.com, emusic.com, audiogalaxy.com, or Apple iTunes".

Once you have positive actions included, then the notice actually becomes a "education notice".

False accusations

It has been suggested that those that make false accusations of copyright infringement (repeatedly) should get their internet cut off -- i propose a compromise -- if a issuer of infringement accusations is shown to be making false accusations repeatedly they must lose their right to make further accusations.

This is inline with the intent of the copyright act, because it would be completely unreasonable to cut off someone based on the accusations of someone who has been proven to not be careful in their accusations.

Copyright Adjudicator

section 92a debate - streamable from tvnzondemand.

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.