The New Zealand music industry has taken aim at illegal music downloaders threatening to use the controversial ‘Skynet’ law for the first time before the new Copyright Tribunal. The three strikes, Skynet law, passed in September last year allows copyright owners to send evidence of alleged infringements to carriers and ISPs, who …
Where did I put my VPN?
I accuse you on the grounds your IP address was used to transfer files.......
So the next time you drive your car on a particular road a policeman can stop you and prosecute you for speeding on the assumption that some people speed on this particular road?
As to the three being made an example of, is that fair justice, being picked on? Juries don't like the little people being bullied.
What? That makes no sense!
A closer analogy would be:
Someone was seen speeding in a car with the same registration plates as yourson this road at 22:03 on the 3rd of September 2012.
However they don't know who was actually driving.
In your analogy, it's up to the owner of the car to say who was driving, otherwise they are liable.
Just run open WiFi. Because its faster than with encryption. Then it cant be proved you were responsible.
Alternatively, the owner of the car may in fact not know who was driving if the car had been stolen. Furthermore, assume a dynamic IP and we get:
Someone was seen speeding in a car with the same registration plates as the car you hired last month on this road at 22:03 on the 3rd of September 2012.
If you cannot prove that you were not driving, you cannot prove that the car had been stolen and you cannot prove that the hire company have made an administrative error in recording the allocation of this car to you, then we will just assume that you are guilty as you obviously cannot prove your innocence.
Oh, and should the car have actually been stolen you'll also need to be able to prove that you had in fact secured said car before the theft, otherwise we will again just assume your guilt and fleece you for as much money as our grubby little mits are permitted to hold.
What a load of old hairy chestnuts. The world has gone mad - as if we didn't know already.
..a tribunal. I don't think they'll be fined that much either.
If you want to cut down on piracy then create a viable alternative. I have friends in New Zealand who tell me that CD albums cost around $35. If you charge that kind of money for music then you will encourage piracy.
The problem the record companies have now is that pirating music is now an everyday activity. Their failure to act quickly has meant that a lot of people simply aren't going to change their ways, even when that alternative comes along.
As to the tribunal, how is the evidence tested? Do the rights holders turn up with ip addresses they wrote down on post-it notes asking for $15000?
Has reducing piracy increased sales?
I read on the BBC website a little while ago that RIANZ claimed the new rules had significantly reduced piracy. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18953353
My question is: Has this reduction in piracy resulted in a corresponding increase in legitimate sales?
If not then surely the industry claims about the massive losses caused by piracy are a lot of rubbish. The losses only occur if downloaders chose pirate copies over legitimate copies, not if they chose pirate copies over not downloading at all.
I think this question is central to the whole debate over pirated content, or at least the economic side of the debate. As far as I am aware NZ is the only place which could produce the required figures to answer the question, has anyone seen such figures?
Re: Has reducing piracy increased sales?
"My question is: Has this reduction in piracy resulted in a corresponding increase in legitimate sales?"
The answer is no, infact stopping piracy has resulted in a drop in legit sales.
France has brought in a three strikes rule which has seen a drop in piracy and a subsequent drop in sales
Don't expect me to buy your products if you ask the Post Office to steam open my envelopes either. I'd rather your nosey parker behaviour resulted in your bankruptcy.
I still go to live gigs. The artists benefit from these but the recording industry doesn't. I can also record all the music I want by streamripping Internet radio, which as far as I know is as legal as recording off analog radio. Streamrippers are easily scriptable, so you can automate filing by artist/genre/album and track name.
From New Zealand with Love
Most people in New Zealand who download movie and music would Not have purchase them in the first place So there is no loss there,
And copying has not gone down they have just (adapted) changed tactics,
Now they use VPN, Cloud storage, but the best way is just to pass around
Your 3TB Hard Drive Full of moves and music and I think Open wifi network Sharing is catching on now.
RIANZ out of touch
And have been for a long time.
The studios (TV and movie) have been looking more carefully at things, which is why DVD movies and TV series are a LOT cheaper than CDs of music. They're also introducing cheap (but not cheap enough - if you want a series it's still cheaper on DVD) downloads of older stuff.
Downloads come under the auspices of APRA (The australasian perfoming rights association), who made an offer to NZ and Australian ISPs in the 1990s of licensing unlimited downloading for $1 per user per year. I really am surprised none of the ISPs took it.
The big question is
How did they gather the alleged evidence of the IP's slurping their valuable product. Unless it can stand the usual tests of evidence gathering then each case should and most likely will be thrown out. Even if thsis is a civil tribunal poking gaping holes in their "evidence" gathering it should show these bastards for the money grabbing, corporate fatcat arseholes they are.
It's time the pirates bought a clue
Copyright laws exist in all civilized countries to protect artistic works. No judicial system is going to allow piracy to go unpunished. Those in denial are in for a very painful education.
Copyright holders are not the problem, pirates are the problem and they will be punished accordingly. Hating copyright holders is wasted energy and foolish as most folks understand the need for copyright laws. Ignorance is not the answer and never a good legal defense.
Re: It's time the pirates bought a clue
"Copyright holders are not the problem, pirates are the problem and they will be punished accordingly. Hating copyright holders is wasted energy and foolish as most folks understand the need for copyright laws. Ignorance is not the answer and never a good legal defense."
What if I want something old? What if I want something not released in my country? What if I want to use it in a MP3 or MP4 player?
The copyright holders are the problem as they refuse to follow the customer wants and while they control the laws they will never change. The only hope the consumer has is wholesale ignoring of the "laws" convinces the copyright holders to change their ways.
Me personally, I wouldn't care to own any content if I could stream what I want, when I want. Now look at Doctor Who. The new series plays in the UK Saturday night. As soon as it finishes, it plays in Australia and can be streamed from the ABC website. Have I pirated a copy of it? No. I've already seen it so why bother.
Piracy solved and at no cost to me.
Commercial stations could be doing exactly the same thing but no they won't. Their licencing agreements and fear of technology won't let them. If the moron had half a brain, they'd work with Google to provide localised advertisments integrated that same a commercial TV does now and stream it on demand. They could then have a premium licencing where users can pay a yearly fee and remove the ads. Piracy dead overnight. Until then screw the copyright holders and their lawyers.