So who is next on the RI hit-list ? | The Coffeehouse

elmer
I'm on my very last life.

I know this has been done to death on the internet.

However, I find it so amazing that a govt would even consider such legislation, just to placate an industry lobby group.

http://creativefreedom.org.nz/s92.html

According to the website, the potential is, that with a single, unsubstantiated accusation, your ISP would be compelled to disconnect your service.

There appears to be no requirement for evidence (RINZ chief comments that this is a ridiculous requirement) or due-process and there appears to be no provision for how/why the suspected activity was detected, and no provision for penalties of false accusation.

There also appears to be no distinction for the type of connection... a company or public connection is fair game if the RI says so.

I thought that this must be a wind-up at first, but it appears to be for real... although getting accurate details is difficult, as both sides of the argument are firmly entrenched in their dogma.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Is there any penalty for making a false accusation? At least the DMCA has the penalty of pejury attached.

Bass
www.spreadfirefox.com/5years/

The solution, of course, is to ab^H^H use this law to take down the website of the "RIANZ" sock puppet organization who lobbied for this law in the first place. Smiley

elmer
I'm on my very last life.

In reply to W3bbo

#Jan 7th @ 6:39 PM

According to the website:

'Section 92 has no punishment for false accuser, leaving this law ripe for abuse'

Now, of course, this is the 'anti-Section92' website, so for all I know, they may well be embroidering the truth... but if not, this is a pretty scary situation.

- Only a single accusation required to compell the ISP to act.
- No requirement for evidence from the accuser.
- No due-processs for the accused.
- No penalty for false accusations.

WTF ??

elmer
I'm on my very last life.

In reply to Bass

#Jan 7th @ 6:48 PM

The 'conspiracy theory' is, that RIAA are using NZ and Australia (similar laws are being lobbied for there) as a precedent 'beach-head' to implement them elsewhere in the world.

Bass
www.spreadfirefox.com/5years/

In reply to elmer

#Jan 7th @ 7:09 PM

I am not so sure about the RIAA, but the MPAA's CEO Dan Glickman has readily admitted to pushing legislation as far as Australia. Make no mistake, the *AA is a bit of title then an actual practice. They are very much interested in the global picture.

SlackmasterK
I write my OWN blogging engines

Just encrypt your packets, as IIRC most clients have the ability to do now. If someone sniffs and decrypts your packets, they've violated the DMCA.

elmer
I'm on my very last life.

In reply to SlackmasterK

#Jan 7th @ 11:08 PM

But that doesn't get you anywhere... as this law proposes that the accuser does not have to provide any evidence that the accused is violating their copyright.

Furthermore, there is no penalty for false or "unsubstantiated" accusations, so there is no need for them to explain how they made their conclusions.

They just need to accuse, and the ISP is then compelled to disconnect.

NZ ISPs are already taking down websites that are accused of copyright violation, with no requirement (or demand) for proof.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to SlackmasterK

#Jan 7th @ 11:08 PM

No they haven't. They would have broken laws similar to mail tampering. The DMCA covers the breaking of DRM. But in any case, the DMCA is a US law, and this is New Zealand. I don't know if A/NZ has anything like the DMCA.

phreaks

New Zealand's new Copyright Law presumes 'Guilt Upon Accusation' and will Cut Off Internet Connections without a trial. CreativeFreedom.org.nz is against this unjust law - help us