And because of this the law will never work. Because people could be downloading their copyrighted content over a P2P network and be either illegally or legally doing it (as in breaking or not breaking the law).

Also the monitoring methods are really bad. They have been known to be so wrong that a law firm contracted to fine people for breaching corporates copyrights has even fined a dead/blind/old person that didn’t know anything about p2p and didn’t download anything. Also they keep reporting things like printers and other devices that are in no way capable of piracy on a p2p network.

Disconnecting someone’s internet connection does not help the content makers in anyway. Even if piracy has a negative impact on sales (which I doubt as many company’s already put me of their products) disconnecting their internet temporarily will not do anything to help sales as they can still manually share with a mate. And their internet will be back up within a week. Their not even getting money out of it. And the only way to stop online piracy is to kick online pirates of the internet. This will not solve piracy so why do it?

This just makes things worse for everyone.

If the government disconnects my internet permanently I will fly to the parliament building and stand outside and not eat until I get my internet on and my rights back.

RIAA have been caught and charged of price fixing. RIAA have sued against damages in sales but then never given the royalties over to the artists (taking someone’s royalties is called stealing). RIAA support only a few companies which do not makeup the entire industry (however they claim to support the entire industry) and each of those companies do not work for the artists as they have shares and work for the shareholders. So to sum it up the RIAA work for a few companies (not all companies) in the music industry whose sole goal is to make money for the shareholder. Given that the RIAA have been caught price fixing, have restrictive DRM, operate in anti-competitive ways, been charged for price fixing, sues school children wrecking their lives with debt forever, and have even stolen from the artists it raises huge amounts of doubt to their so called motive “supporting artists + making the world nicer”. That coupled with the fact that they do not represent the majority of people and that in a democracy the majority decides what to do makes the law dum.

Iv had to explain to quite a few foreigners the situation within new zealand.

In short:
‘we pre much have a monopoly situation, where one company owns most of the infrastructure and the only pipe out of the country’

Many are quite surprised and horrified to hear that.

theier old system of working is a thing of past !!!!

http://www.Urssiva.com

Hope they change..

It’s funny how France came up with the idea of 3 strikes and then they didn’t implement it but some other “democratic” nations are.

I think it’s because people who’d never even heard of the issue suddenly noticed half their Facebook or Twitter friends’ faces turning into black squares. When they asked “WTF?” they started learning (a) what the issue was, and (b) how many people cared about it. Pretty soon they also blacked out their profiles and started following tweets and links and – hey presto! It became a truly viral protest.

Hats off to everyone involved – this was NZ’s first real taste of the power of online activism. Hopefully it won’t be the last.

Right on the money. If you think this 3-strikes legislation is neither fascist nor plutocratic, then you need to learn what the words fascist and plutocratic mean.

You’re right that New Zealand was founded on democratic principles, which means those who let this legislation pass are acting as traitors to their own country. Until they’re purged from the government, it can’t rightly be called a democracy.

I’m sure this is all lost on you and your two braincells, however.