Yesterday’s proceedings in the ongoing “iiTrial” High Court appeal turned up an interesting problem in the copyright holders’ wish to turn ISPs into their enforcers: a savvy and funded user group could use Australia’s copyright law to prevent ISPs from issuing notices against them. This issue emerged during submissions by …
I've torrented the odd linux iso in my time
But I really don't have much of a problem with idea of three notices, a couple of 'final' warnings and then people being chucked off the net.
And then when that's in place maybe the music and movie industries can work together on a decent, low-cost, worldwide, fast, online media delivery service.
You know, two or three bucks for a movie, no DRM or time limits, fast downloads or streaming, transcodes for mobile devices (at no extra charge). Given today's technology this stuff is cheap and trivial, clearly two such forward-facing industries will be quick to embrace it as soon as they have the time to spare when piracy is gone?
"And then when that's in place maybe the music and movie industries can work together on a decent, low-cost, worldwide, fast, online media delivery service." You really think, if the media owers managed to stifle all copyright infingement, that they would then start creating media delivery service over the internet that people would be happy to use?
I assume that ROFL means you aren't serious :-)
The only reason that apple sells music now is because the studios found they couldn't stop the copyright infringement, and works on the basis that a small percentage of something is better than nothing at all. If the movie and music industry could stop all copyright infingement they would go straight back to their pre-existing models, this entire debacle is all about preserving a model that provided income far above anything that is reasonable.
So your logic is...
The pigopolists want to try and stop ALL copyright infringement, to turn back the clock - so we must not let them try and stop ANY of it?
That's a big bucket of Fail.
It simply needs the Studios to give limited copyrights to the ISPs for the sole purposes of verification of user's copyright breaches.
On the other hand, the ISPs will incur an expense to do this and may even breach implicit contracts with their users.
It really comes down to whether there is legislation (or commercial agreement) in place that not only exempts ISPs from monitoring copyright infringements, but also requires them to do so, and as a final element re-imburses them for the cost of doing so.
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE
- Analysis Hey, Teflon Ballmer. Look, isn't it time? You know, time to quit?
- Murdoch Facebook gloat: You're like my $580m, 'CRAPPY' MySpace