Modified 3 Strikes Back on Agenda For New Zealand Pirates
Written by enigmax on July 14, 2009After the previous Labour government failed in its attempts to set up an ISP code of practice to deal with copyright infringements via section 92a of the Copyright Act, today sees new proposals revealed. ISPs won’t be expected to police their networks, but instead decisions – including 3 strikes – will be made by the Copyright Tribunal.
In 2008, the New Zealand government passed so-called ‘3-strike’ legislation designed to have alleged repeat copyright infringers disconnected from the Internet. A code of practice was drawn up by the entertainment industries and ISPs, which attempted to create a framework for ISPs to disconnect alleged infringers. But it wasn’t to be.
After outrage in the Internet community coupled with resistance by ISPs led to a failure to reach agreement in the allocated period, Prime Minister John Key announced that the law would be have to be delayed. In the end not even a delay would be enough to reach consensus and it was announced that Section 92A of the Copyright Act 1994 would not come into force on 27 March as scheduled, but instead would be amended to address areas of concern.
Prime Minister Key set Minister of Commerce Simon Power to work on a replacement and today he put those proposals to the cabinet.
The main development is that ISPs will no longer be expected to perform the role of ‘Copyright Cops’ for the entertainment industries. Instead, that role will be performed by New Zealand’s Copyright Tribunal which at least at this early stage appears to offer those accused some kind of due process via an independent body.
The bad news is that the fraught with difficulty and disproportionate response of disconnections – aka ‘3 Strikes’ – is still on the table. The new framework is proposed as follows;
Step 1: In the event that a copyright holder records an infringement of its rights by an Internet user (unauthorized uploading), they will be required to send an initial infringement notice to the corresponding ISP. Once the account holder is identified by matching the alleged infringing IP-address with customer records, the initial infringement notice will be passed to him or her, via the ISP.
Step 2: Should there be another infringement, the above process would be repeated but this time the account holder would also receive a ‘Cease and Desist’ notice. At this point an account holder would have the opportunity to respond to copyright holders.
Step 3: If after issuing a Cease and Desist notice infringements continue, the copyright holders can then apply to the Copyright Tribunal to require the corresponding ISP to hand over the personal details of the account holder. Interestingly copyright holders can already achieve something similar, simply by going directly to the courts.
Step 4: At this stage copyright holders are free to issue a complaint with the Copyright Tribunal, who will in turn notify the account holder that an additional complaint has been made against him or her. The account holder is then given the opportunity to put their side of the story and move to mediation. In this instance costs would be shared and a government-approved mediator would be provided. Should this step fail the Copyright Tribunal would decide from a range of penalties such as fines or ultimately, disconnection.
Of course, the above is not without its issues.
Right now New Zealand’s Copyright Tribunal, a body operating under the Ministry of Justice is a small concern used to dealing with smaller, more manageable copyright disputes. Indeed, currently it has only three part-time staff. It’s going to need more resources if it’s to deal with these cases effectively.
However, Matthew Holloway from The Creative Freedom Foundation believes the tribunal system could be workable;
“It’s not necessarily an unsolvable problem. It could make sense to initially restrict the number of complaints by dealing only with certain scales of infringement. The scale could be adjusted in time. This would be similar to the approach within Canada where the police have said that certain small scales of infringement won’t be investigated because they simply don’t have the resources.”
The discussion document for the amended Section 92a will be open for submissions until August 7.
Previously: MPAA Will Hunt Down isoHunt Founder for Life
Next: Hid.im Converts Torrents into PNG Images
50 Responses
I cant believe they are still actually considering doing this, as a New Zealander myself, i think this is an outrageous law.
Im going to do my best to put a stop to it, hopefully others will feel the same way
Yea I saw that on the news.
This is why Private trackers are essential as they at least rar the files to they cant pick it up if it infringing the copyright.
this is just stupid …. New Zealanders shouldn’t have a law like this put on us…….
we all need to do our very best to stop it!
The cancer continues to struggle?
The apocolypse is coming, these are the signs.
The end of the world is near
laws like this will only encourage anonymous P2P. Bring it.
soon we’ll kill you all
Just stop stealing the copyrights…
ridiculous, really
@9: All these comments? I agree, they are ridiculous.
How about this for an idea.
a website is set up which enables all users to sell a fraction of their computer to other members of the site and in return purchase the same value of the other members machines. The technically you are only sharing files between other system you own.
anyone with any legal nous shed some light on this?
I’m not worried, I’ve already started work on my own hadopi router, more details to come :D
To all french LoL
Use 2D barcodes to transfer data send it in the mail to all your friends they will never be abble to track you down over the internet.
I hear that 2D barcodes like the QR Code are reaching storage capacity of 2 to 5 megabytes using color multiplexing wouldn’t be fun to print out a page with a movie in it?
Or more fun yet have the QR Code embedded in a lot of LoLCats photos on Flickr and have the MAFIAA trying to take down all of them LoL
I wonder if it would be acceptable to the french to make a law that make the mail service in France responsible for copyright abuse LoL
11 Jul 14, 2009 at 12:13 by Anonymous
Did you try Omemo or other P2P anonymous filesharing or a darknet they operate on the same principal all of them.
How about they shut off your electricity forever too. Then they would be sure you’re not going to sneaker-net their copyrights. Lame ass politicians and industry folk need to drop some acid and open their eyes to how retarded they’re being…
its illegal to break a secure connection for a civil issue.
httpS trackers are needed.
connect to ssl ports on irc,https tor sites, and a usenet acc with 50 secure bots :)
come catch me, fuckers!
So after the second accusation you get a chance to respond not on the first one?
And if it does go to this tribunal both have to split the cost?
So if your innocent and have your ip spoofed by someone else your basically screwed.
So who’s fault is this corruption of the law?
Why its the newzealand population that who…remember government are public servants and the public are there employers.
And an employees is responsible for everything there employees does.
So if the newzealand public don’t not like this sack your employees and get new ones.
Simple
-Jay
ppl should use freenet and problem solved
This is probably the first case where I would say the private sites COULD help.. cause these morons arent going to be able to get in.. or mabye im thinking about this wrong..
@17: YOU CAN’T SPOOF AN IP…
(Why do I get this error: “You are posting comments too quickly. Slow down.”?)
@19:
Depends on where you want to use it but “IP spoofing” is and official term of type of attack. Usually used in DDOS attacks to hide the sender (at least from final receiver). It’s like with mail. You can actually write a fake return address. Same is possible with IP packets. You can overwrite sender IP to anything you want.
Another question is that in case of torrents such attack will be useless. Or so I think. I mean that you send connection request with fake IP as a result connection acceptation message is sent to this fake IP you set up and of course this connection fails as on that IP no one awaits for a connection. As a result torrent tracker fails to establish a connection…
Another thing is that viruses and trojans can be used to achieve that result. Just infect some machine with a virus that turns this machine in to torrent proxy or something.
“due process via an independent body.”
Any one thinking this independent body will be soon owned by the RIAA?
what if the copyright holders send the first notice to all the IPs? because no legal letter is being sent, a customer can’t say anything at this time. So in sense they mean that it’s three strike law and we will start counting from [b]2[/b]
Another reason to say…
F**K THIS S**T COUNTRY!
Go to youtube and type “Spoofing IP” or “IP spoofing” and you will see how impossible really it is LoL
only love the old copyright!!
copyright was designed to protect the creative from other commercial companies not costumers!
now they are suing people that share files that they paid for and wanted to share because they love the content!!!!!!!!
fock the current copyright
and ofcourse the mafiaa riaa and in the netherlands where i live Brein stupid motherfockers you are ruing peoples lives asshols!
John Keys needs to be assassinated for this. That would send a clear message to the rest of parliament not to mess with us. We need to all start our own militias up.
If I contract a work pay for it and don’t receive anything in return can I sue?
Because copyright was supposed to be a contract were the artists get a little time to recoup their costs and get paid but I don’t see any works comming the way of society they robbed everybody from what they paid for and have the audacity to tell us that we are the thiefs!.
Lets solve the problem, what the people want is a copyright term of no more then 5 years(2 would be great), our privacy laws reinstated and severe limitations on what the industry can say its chargeable uses can be, besides that what we want is that copyright changes have to be accepted by a popular referendum we lost the confidence in politicians and want this to be put it to the public to vote for it.
Will there be penalties for the copyright holders if the tribunal rules in favour of the defendant?
After all, there should be some penalty for turning innocent peoples lives upside down and if you ask me, the penalty should be substantially harsher so as to keep the copyright holders from playing fast and loose with the IP harvesting cos we all know that they DO get it wrong.
That being said, this should get nuked ASAP
Lets solve the problem. Free internet.
I guess Tibet too… while we’re at it.
@1: I’m going to do my best to put a stop to it, hopefully others will feel the same way
This is probably a good palce to start: Pirate Party New Zealand
it is amazing to see 7 corporations of parasites writing law in so many countries at once.
it is amazing!
This mean that capitalism is broken since corporations are overtaking democraticly elected governements.
So now what is the difference with communism?
In communism the governement control everything in this broken capitalism the corporations control everything. This is a return to feodalism in which corporate executives are princes and kings.
In both case there is no freedom.
it is time to take arm and reconquer our countries.
We have to destroy the big corporations starting with the entertainment industry militarly.
worst story man
pathetic story sister
useless human being we are going to be in near future because of this copyright issue
“Once the account holder is identified by matching the alleged infringing IP-address”
As seen with HADOPI in France, an IP Address alone is insufficient to identify pirates. That’s where this law will fail just like HADOPI.
Nice to see that countries everywhere are coming to a decision about how they will enforce copyrights.
Easy solution: download at your pleasure until you receive a Cease and Desist. It is clear for me that most people will never receive a C&D
If this is their best anmo they have lost the war.
As soon as you get a notice, encrypt headers.
Thank you very much.
Dont mention it…
Hi folks, it’s Matthew Holloway from the Creative Freedom Foundation here…
Just so you know that quote from me was before the release of any information and was more of an theoretical response to a magazine article in the National Business Review saying that a tribunal would useless because it would be swamped with cases. Naturally I responded saying that there are ways of dealing with that.
Later that day the draft proposal came out.
Just to give some history… the previous version of s92A was based on allegations of copyright infringement and whether an ISP would disconnect you (under risk of being a secondary copyright infringer themselves!). It also called for internet termination. Even if the use was legal the threats could be used to take down internet connections, much like how YouTube takes down videos.
We called this Guilt Upon Accusation.
That this new proposal has due process and an independent government body, like the courts, is an improvement over what was there.
There are however some significant issues ahead such as the choice of Internet Termination, that false accusations receive no punishment, and so on.
We’ve responded to the draft proposal here:
http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=347
I keep seeing people mention private trackers and the like. WTF are you talking about? Like, your buddy next door has a tracker for torrents that only he and you are on? Duh. Once people you know start using a tracker or a torrent site, it ceases to be private. Any moron from the RIAA could join it and then, poof, infiltrated. I would LOVE to find an actual private torrent site, but methinks they are pie in the sky. They do not exist. If they did, then no one would know about them, eh? And if you join it, then it isn’t private anymore. Can we sue the assholes at the RIAA or MPAA for harrassment or causing stress in our lives? LOL.
As a N.Zr i’m appalled this is even being considered by our government.I am ashamed to admit i helped vote these cretins in.I won’t be making that mistake again though.
Since the escalation of infringment to a criminal matter i’ve downloaded and shared even more and i’ve taught a number of ppl to do the same,so fuck you John Key!
In ways this is worse.
Dragged through a legal process with shared costs, little/no requirement for evidence, and to top it of theres still the assumption of guilt.
Hell the law isnt even fit to be passed onto a select committee in its current state, its missing so many important details that it belongs on the back of a napkin.
so whats the best way to make it difficult for these bastards to know what im doing??
and say the internet plan is under my parents name and im doing the downloading what happens then??
gna start dl my torrents as rar as well!do i have to unzip to be able to seed though???
You go anonymous, encrypted and decentralized.
http://www.p2pforums.com/viewforum.php?f=102&sid=41e1e99410b75fd8aaa439cac4035784
Dont governments have real work to do?
I mean really democracy doesn’t mean big corporations should have control of our legal system. Laws are meant to protect the public not corporations at the expense of the people….
this law will be thrown out by the new zealand public just like section 92a was. its just national trying to look tough on copyright abuse. and to those fuckers saying nz is a shit place to live you’re retarded. nz is a fantastic place to live, best bud in the world other than british columbia. nuff said.
After reviewing the ‘3 strikes’ law I have discovered its actually a 1 strike law.
1 letter, then pretty much straight to the tribunal if they aren’t satisfied/on second notice.
Putting up a new article about this?
Admitted layperson’s hypothesis :)
…
Spectrum Reform (better frequencies) (Google it) + Wireless Mesh Networks (minus corporate ISP’s) = Freedom (or closer to it)
Given sufficient mesh clouds (even using cellphones, etc.) and maybe some special community-run ISP’s for the long-distance “jumps”, I suspect it might be possible to bypass corporate ISP backbones altogether.
Near-future maybe, but what does the law do when that happens? When everyone is simply exchanging info via their own digital devices?
9 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.