Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

1st Strikes Issued Under New Zealand Anti-Piracy Laws

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the lousy-umps dept.

Government 123

Master Moose writes "New Zealand's largest ISPs confirmed yesterday that they had received their first notices under the government's new copyright regime, which came into effect on September 1. All the notices received so far appear to be from the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand. Telecom, for example, received 42 notices — 35 for alleged download of songs by R&B star Rihanna, six for Lady Gaga tunes and one for British recording artist Taio Cruz. Curiously, it was the music industry, rather than the movie industry, that fired the first shot. It was believed the Motion Picture Association was keen to go after copyright infringers."

cancel ×

123 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Happy November from the Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916056)

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

Re:Happy November from the Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916484)

"Confidante", not "cosmonaut", you fucking idiot.

Re:Happy November from the Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916516)

Nigga you just got trolled hard.

reputation games (2)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916070)

It was believed the Motion Picture Association was keen to go after copyright infringers.

RIAA is already pretty universally hated. They killed Napster and are the ones who usually make the headlines. It makes sense from a PR standpoint to let them fall on the sword.

Re:reputation games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916152)

Wait are we safe if we download *good* music and movies?

Re:reputation games (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916220)

as long as it does not involve gangsta nigggers then yeah, have fun

sorry but some thug who might harass you because you're wearing the wrong colors is a fucking nigger. i don't care what skin color he has. the copyright interests are like that. copying something when it is effortless to do so is now the wrong color. the copyright cartels are the fucking niggers. see how easy that is?

Re:reputation games (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916270)

Take a moment to realize that you might be inserting some personal biases in there. "Sorry guys, I think EVERYONE who sucks is a nigger!" isn't a valid justification to any reasonable person. Maybe it was your upbringing, or perhaps you're hanging out with the wrong crowd. I'm sure it's not your fault. Either way, you could certainly benefit from getting some help ushering you into the 21st century with the rest of the adults. Notice how almost all results are identical in attitude toward the prosecution, but you're the only one who chose to respond like that. Is everyone else wrong, or are you?

Re:reputation games (2)

xenobyte (446878) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918196)

You beat me to that comment...

These 'pirates' should be prosecuted for having no taste at all in music. The damage people like them do to the industry is far greater than any number of pirates.

Notice (2)

CanEHdian (1098955) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916096)

Kiwis that object to this system, feel free to take action [pirateparty.org.nz] .

P.S. No, writing to elected officials will not work.

Re:Notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916126)

> P.S. No, writing to elected officials will not work.

especially if you never try.

Re:Notice (2)

CanEHdian (1098955) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916170)

> P.S. No, writing to elected officials will not work.

especially if you never try.

Sure. Try all you want. [slashdot.org] But it won't work [slashdot.org] . The only thing is leveraging electoral consequences against the influence of the *AA's. Party membership numbers is also a relevant metric in the "from what direction is the wind blowing?" game.

Re:Notice (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916242)

The problem, in general, is that it's only a relatively small number of people. If you want to change the minds of elected representatives, you have to have sufficient support to make them feel that there are consequences. A few letters on a topic isn't going to be enough to convince the representative that your side on any given issue is important. A few thousand letters, however, would tell the representative that this is an issue that may in fact be key for him to be on the right side of.

Re:Notice (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916440)

Riiiight, because if given the choice of the big fat checks and the cushy job as a lobbyist for the industry they sucked off, or listening to the people, they are gonna choose listening to the people? What are you smoking and can I have some?

Why do you think there is OWS and Arab Springs all over the planet? the incredible consolidation of power has made the entire electoral process corrupted beyond repair. they don't give a fuck what you think, you can write petitions, protest, vote until your little fingers bleed, they don't give a fuck. Its a revolving door between the corridors of power and the big multinationals and once you make it to the big leagues you are set for life.

Why the hell would they care what a peasant like you thinks? The ONLY "people" they care about are corporations and guys with names like Gates and Dell that can write them big fat checks. He who has the gold makes the rules and the top 1%, who are the same ones locking all the IP into "forever minus a single day" copyrights, are making damned sure that ain't YOU! Hell didn't you read Obama's responses to the petitions? it was frankly the most nicely worded 'please go fuck off and die" I've ever read!

Re:Notice (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916472)

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." - Mao Tse-Tung

Re:Notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916960)

> "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." - Mao Tse-Tung

"Go ahead, kill me." - Tank Man

Did Labyrinth teach you nothing?

Re:Notice (4, Insightful)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917560)

Well, as far as we know, Tank Man is likely dead as he's unlikely to have survived captivity after causing Chinese leadership to lose face, while the government that killed him is considered a superpower. It has grown quite a bit more powerful.

A lesson some naive people clearly haven't learned.

Re:Notice (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918580)

Hell didn't you read Obama's responses to the petitions? it was frankly the most nicely worded 'please go fuck off and die" I've ever read!

That petition site even has a "please take these petitions seriously instead of just acting like you care" petition.

Re:Notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916876)

> But it won't work

That's exactly what they want you to think.

Industry money equates to indirect votes. (you can buy votes with it)
Constituent mindshare equates to direct votes. (piss off one and you've lost one for sure, probably 10x for each you hear from)

Votes are the currency of power, and direct votes are worth a lot more than indirect ones. For better or worse, this is how Obama won in 2008.

Don't let them convince you that you are a sheep. If you do, then you will be one, and it will be by your own hand, not theirs.

Re:Notice (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918610)

Industry money equates to indirect votes. (you can buy votes with it)
Constituent mindshare equates to direct votes. (piss off one and you've lost one for sure, probably 10x for each you hear from)

But constituent mindshare is a weak effect, especially when in most Western countries, useful idiots who buy into trickle-down economics and all that bullshit make up 30-60% of the voting base, acting as unpaid corporate lobbyists. It's an effect that's easy to overpower with industry money.

How do you know he never tried?. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916188)

Hmm?

Re:How do you know he never tried?. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916814)

Because it's the classic rationalization of someone who is too mentally impotent to even try.

(Someone who was too lazy to try wouldn't have bothered to post on a web site, so we can rule that out)

There is great comfort in knowing you are a slave and powerless. It absolves you of any responsibility to fight for a better society, which is both scary and real hard work.

Re:Notice (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919430)

> P.S. No, writing to elected officials will not work.

especially if you never try.

Believe me, I've tried over and over and over again. Finding someone in the U.S. government that hasn't been bribed by Big Content is damn near impossible, they dump money on both parties. I'd imagine it's much the same in every country where money is allowed to be given directly to political candidates or representatives....I've certainly seen no evidence to the contrary.

Re:Notice (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917250)

I'm disconnected as bro.
Is it mean bro.
yeah, mean as bro.

Wait, I've got one more,
Once were warriors, now a luddites.

Thanks ICE (1)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916102)

At least they weren't labelled as child pornographers. I have to wonder just how much longer people are actually going to put up with this crap.

Re:Thanks ICE (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916140)

The only way people won't put up with this crap is if everyone (not literally, but enough) to overwhelm the system into being incapable of stopping it. In a democratic society, if everyone broke the law, then not would the law fall under that it is not the will of the people anymore?

Re:Thanks ICE (1)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916180)

in a perfect system yes, the only times you truly see this happen is on votes that the people actually make. Amendments and what not. For most of this stuff, it's the elected officials that make the decisions and by the time the decision is made, voting them out does not necessarily fix the problem.

Re:Thanks ICE (4, Interesting)

unrtst (777550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916566)

Everyone (not literally, but enough) is already breaking the law. That doesn't do anything to get laws overturned. That only works if everyone is also held to the law (sued/arrested/fined/etc). Ex - speeding. Damn near EVERYONE speeds, but that hasn't done a damn thing to get rid of that law. They just limit how many people they ticket to socially acceptable level.

I think there is another option, and believe it's time will come. Going back to the car analogy, this would be like filming the cops that are always filming us...

* Share non-RIAA artists' music (doesn't matter who does this)
* Log downloading/uploading IP's via a bunch of clients (bittorrent)
* Watch for RIAA related IP's (them, or the hired lapdogs that do their work)
* Have non-RIAA artist sue the RIAA for copyright infringement under the same laws they use. (or have them sign over their management of their "IP" to your organization)

Do this enough, and it won't be profitable for the RIAA to do their tracking/monitoring/prosecuting of the P2P networks. That's how they're finding people right now - by joining the same P2P share, and watching for the IP's the upload parts of the content to them. This would make a great EFF or similar project.

It would take very little to pull this off. There are fairly small companies doing this for the RIAA already. Just do the same for non-members but only sue the RIAA related people. Those non-RIAA artists would also benefit from an RIAA with reduced power and influence, as they'd be more likely to be seen and distributed in mainstream places.

If the claim is made that you are targeting them and not protecting your "IP" from all the other downloaders, there is already a precedent set for that - the RIANZ, in this case, is only suing a handful of people... and there were certainly many others they saw while doing their tracking. Ditto on the relatively small number of RIAA suits in USA versus the number of people downloading/uploading.

The other possible outcome would be that the precedent is set such that, if one is doing this kind of monitoring/prosecuting, they must do it to all offenders that they ID. That would actually be great because a HUGE carpet bomb of claims to LOTS of people would have to be sent out by the RIAA and, while that might scare a lot of people, there are going to be FAR FAR FAR more people that are horribly pissed off by it, including many people in power positions. That shit would end quick.

One disclaimer - I don't believe in violating copyright and do not endorse it, but I do believe there are fair use situations (sharing a song with a couple friends; getting a drm-free copy of content you already purchased; format shifting (downloading a vhs rip of a vhs you already own)) that are perfectly acceptable (though possibly illegal).

Re:Thanks ICE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917290)

...and then each of your friends will also share with a couple of their friends, and so on; and then you realise that this is exactly how bittorrent works.

Re:Thanks ICE (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917594)

Well, have you seen the US law? In total, it's so big that it's pretty certain that EVERYONE is breaking some law.

Does that mean it's undemocratic? If so, why is it supported and not fixed by democratically elected legislative body?

Re:Thanks ICE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37918816)

Question assumes false reality.

Does that mean it's undemocratic? Yes.

Why is it supported and not fixed by a democratically elected legislative body? The body in question is not democratically elected. The body in question is also corrupt beyond the critical threshold of such a body (ie; enough is corrupt that they easily squash and/or override members who are not corrupt). The corruption is in favor of what might be called the "capitalistic democracy"; which is to say that it's "one dollar one vote" as opposed to "one citizen one vote". This means that those with deep pockets get represented, and those who do not directly give certain legislators cash and prizes... don't.

Drop in bandwidth usage in NZ (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916118)

Here in New Zealand the bandwidth usage for the whole country dropped by 15% following September 1st when the law came into effect. It will be interesting watch how all of this unfolds.

Re:Drop in bandwidth usage in NZ (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916864)

Still, knowing somebody from NZ I can very well assure everybody that they haven't pirated only 42 files in the last 2 months. In the last two miliseconds maybe...

Re:Drop in bandwidth usage in NZ (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919602)

Oh good, let's see the extra income these industries suddenly started getting on Sept 1st.

Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (2)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916142)

You know where they can stick their umbarrreellla-ellla-ellla-aaayyyy-ayyyy.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (3, Informative)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916162)

don't blame the artist, they are getting shafted by the same ass-clowns that are issuing out these notices. The RIAA steals so much money from them it's unbelievable. I just wish that the suit against the Canadian RIAA hadn't been settled and had gone the course. Then, at least, the artists would have had some semblance of hope in seeing some money back from the thieves ill-gotten gains.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

Cheerio Boy (82178) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916218)

don't blame the artist, they are getting shafted by the same ass-clowns that are issuing out these notices. The RIAA steals so much money from them it's unbelievable. I just wish that the suit against the Canadian RIAA hadn't been settled and had gone the course. Then, at least, the artists would have had some semblance of hope in seeing some money back from the thieves ill-gotten gains.

Part of what needs to happen is the artists need to stand up for themselves and stop being the slaves that the **AA turn them into.

Unfortunately most of them are stuck on the golden hamster wheel and are afraid to get off.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916316)

It doesn't help that for many of them the alternative is a distribution system that amounts to "Thanks for the freebies." They might see some money from the evil record companies (and they are indeed evil, thieving bastards), but they aren't going to see any from The Pirate Bay.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (3, Interesting)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916368)

Google Sam Tsui, or Kurt Hugo-Schneider. Easily the most talented singer sI've heard in a while. While I couldn't find any information on their income, they appear to have made music their full-time job and obviously have enough money to buy expensive cameras and drum kits and the like.

You can make money without a record label. The book linked in my sig is now finished, undergoing the last few revisions before I put it to the Kindle store. I'm not expecting it to be the next Star Wars, but the point is, the barrier to entry is very low.

Record labels, publishing companies, other 'talent aggregators'... are now essentially obsolete.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (2)

nathan s (719490) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916546)

And the signal-to-noise ratio is extremely high.

I'm by no means defending the status quo, but having produced music and books which have been freely available for years, I've learned one thing. Marketing is a major hurdle that any independent content producer will have to learn to do effectively in order to make money. The barriers to entry have been lowered, and that has introduced a flood of competition, so that it's extremely difficult to find an audience even at a price of "free" without resorting to tactics that I personally find objectionable (spamming your products all over every available form with a "submit" button that you can find seems to be the best way to be successful as far as I can tell, apart from having already high-profile friends to do word-of-mouth/reviews for you -- that and writing books that explain "how to get rich quick by selling books on the internet." ;) ). Anecdotally, I've had one of my novels on Kindle for months now at various price points, and I've sold a grand total of two copies, both in the first week to people I know, and I've gone the usual Twitter/Goodreads/etc. promotional routes without any "success." I suspect that, discounting luck, it would require me to physically go promote it at various conventions/stores/etc. in order to make much more headway.

So while I agree with you that you certainly can make money online, just the fact that the barriers have been lowered isn't sufficient. Be prepared to throw in a lot of time trying to figure out ways to attract even a bit of attention for your work - if you aren't a good marketer, then it's down to luck, and relying on luck is a good way to stay broke.:) The positive thing is, it seems like if you aren't an A-list novelist anyway, this would be the expected course of action even through a traditional publishing route, since I hear that they only bother actually promoting the ones that have an already-quantifiable ROI. I don't think you (or I) are losing anything at all by pursuing the self-publishing route.:)

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917110)

The signal to noise ratio in the commercial industry is already as high as it can get as far as I am concerned, add more noise to the system and it would make no difference to me - it is all noise at this point (music industry specifically here). Every new artist I have discovered as a listener in the last 2 years or more has been through word of mouth of some sort, be it friends or discussion on the internet. The commercial distribution of music has nothing to do with quality anymore, or if it does then it is lost in the ocean of crap.

Commercial labels did this to themselves, I can have no sympathy.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919680)

I agree 100%. The radio has been a joke for a decade at least, ever since Clear Channel bought up all the commercial stations in the country, we've been suffering under modern day Payola [wikipedia.org] crap. You hear the same 30 songs in rotation all day long, and at night when a lot of them switch over to computer it seems like they play even less.

MTV hasn't played music since sometime in the early 2000's (last time I even watched the channel was when The Osbournes was on, and they didn't play music then). I suppose Youtube is the only mainstream place to see music videos anymore, but that still depends on someone sitting down and searching for a particular artist, and even then a lot of the time the music or videos are uploaded, not by the labels, but by fans of the artist, which then end up getting yanked down because the music industry is fucking retarded.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917782)

Sorry, but your Slashdot posts are more carefully written than your book. Seriously, get yourself someone to read your book and report back all the mistakes in grammar and spelling. While you're at it, you may want to insert more plot line twists / story elements, it's blatantly obvious where you are going with the entire book early on. Character development is also severely lacking.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

nathan s (719490) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919702)

Only addressing this AC to mention an extra point - even negative reviews directly on a book would be more helpful than none. Something your friends should keep in mind if they are interested in helping you succeed.:)

[To directly address the AC "criticism," what mistakes there are in spelling or grammar in any of my books/stories (you don't say which one you're referring to) are intentional. The most interesting real criticism I've gotten from a couple dozen actual readers (I did say I've been doing this for years, and my lack of success on the Kindle front is not really relevant here) is that my Fourwar story contained too much profanity for their tastes and could I please remove it so they could pass it to person X or Y.:P Which says to me that there are two primary problems with my story - one, the audience is not that big to begin with compared to, say, a romance novel, and two, the existing audience is slashed because of moral issues like the profanity. Something else for would-be writers to keep in mind, and again, these are more marketing issues than they are technical.]

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918674)

Oh jeez do you actually believe this?

They can sell their music cheap and DRM-free. Then there will be no incentive to pirate, and there will be no parasitic middleman to pay off.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (3, Insightful)

Znork (31774) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917210)

Artists are a dime a dozen. The publishing industry knew that even when they lobbied for copyright from the start; simply taking somebody elses work and getting exclusive rights to it because you published it was a bit strong to pass politically so they used artists and creators as an excuse.

From the perspective of economics and power it didn't matter anyway if the creators got a pittance, they'd never get more as there is and has always been a vast overproduction of creative materials. The scarcity is in channel space and consumer attention, not in getting material to shove in there.

Had copyright ever been for the sake of creators then reproduction and distribution would have been unhindered but with the creator automatically entitled to a share of every sale. As it is now, they're the weak party to the bargain and as long as copyright works the way it does, they're screwed, and if they don't want to get screwed anymore, they'll be replaced with someone else.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916522)

don't blame the artist

- Buying music by these artists funds this extortion.
- If I can't blame the artists for their own act of signing up with a recording label, who exactly should I blame?
- The most popular well known artists typically are not poor unless they've squandered their money or made terrible busienss deals. (I'm sure there are exceptions but that's the rule).
- I also blame others like corrupt politicians that allow petty copyright infringements to carry heavier penalties than violent crimes.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (2)

HopefulIntern (1759406) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917398)

What we need is "FairTrade" music. Much like the movement for Fair Trade food/coffee etc. we need a label to stick on music that indicated it is fair trade, and then people can boycott music that is not Fair Trade.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916542)

I feel somewhat bad for all the current artists getting screwed (and less so for the popular ones, because even with the RIAA taking a lot of money they're still fucking rich), but the RIAA is going into the shitter. They're essentially irrelevant now - more and more music is being sold via iTunes and other services. Pretty soon, CDs will be a novelty like vinyl records.

Every musician I know who aspires to become a professional performer is very aware of the raw deal artists have been getting for decades and now know to stay away from the really big labels. It's harder to screw people over when everyone knows the deal is most definitely not in your favor.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917274)

don't blame the artist, they are getting shafted by the same ass-clowns that are issuing out these notices.

Nope, they are willingly putting out for these people.

Whilst I dont blame a battered wife for getting hit, the simple fact is they do have to do something about it themselves, otherwise the beatings will continue. These "artists" (I use the term very loosely when talking about Rhianna) will continue to be abused until they stop willing to be abused.

As an old /. sig once said "the music industry cares about artists in the same way a parasite cares about its host".

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

HopefulIntern (1759406) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917408)

otherwise the beatings will continue

Rhianna

I see what you did there.

BULL SHIT (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918080)

All the big artist support these actions not just by signing up but by active lobbying for even stricter laws. Only a tiny handful oppose this, the rest, the drug addicts and the moralists evade taxes and want strict draconian rules to save guard their own income.

Look at the actions of say a U2, Bono the great moralist who played for the apartheid regime in South Africa, uses every tax dodge imaginable and whines about people "stealing" music.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916374)

As if you would have bought from those artists anyway. That's why boycotts don't work......half the time people calling for a boycott are the ones who wouldn't have shopped there anyway.

Re:Thanks for the list of artists to boycott (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916818)

They're just the most "popular". The RIAA and its cancerous, local representatives have a lot of artists under their thumbs.

For example I check sites like http://www.riaaradar.com/, Wikipedia, etc so see what label the band is associated with before I buy something. Even though I'd never touch stuff from those mention in TFA - even if it was free - I reconsidered buying quite a few other albums because the band was part of that corrupt cesspool.

sue the bastards! (1)

canipeal (1063334) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916164)

The real offence here is horrible taste in music!

Downloading? (1)

caseih (160668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916198)

I always thought it was uploading that was illegal (making available). As far as downloading goes, all of those songs are available officially (and unofficially) on youtube for free. Given that cracking down on these downloads makes less and less sense as you're certainly not missing out on any lost sales. My girlfriend's roommates listen to music exclusively on pandora and youtube (yes youtube). Other than Pandora license fees, the RIAA isn't getting a cent out of them or any of their friends. Time to listen to "don't download this song" again.

Re:Downloading? (2)

chiguy (522222) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916228)

When torrenting, you are usually downloading and distributing simultaneously. I suppose you could be a just a leecher, but most bt clients throttle you for this.

Re:Downloading? (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916290)

Some countries indeed had the making available clause in most of their laws. However the new laws that implement 1-3 strikes (ACTA, TPP and alike) actually make downloading (consuming) media (any) illegal in any type of fashion which you haven't payed for. Even if someone would upload a video to Youtube without full and proper licensing (such as an artist promoting their album), you downloading it would be illegal.

Re:Downloading? (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916298)

I always thought it was uploading that was illegal (making available)

Then you were always wrong. There have historically been harsher penalties for distribution, but downloading is still a copyright violation.

Not to mention that most people using P2P upload anyway.

Re:Downloading? (1)

jedwidz (1399015) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916666)

You may well be correct from a legal standpoint in some jurisdictions, but regardless of the law, 'downloading is a copyright violation' is just plain fucking braindead. Not least because it's inconsistent with how copyright licensing actually works.

When I download a song from iTunes, I rely on someone on the other end of the wire having a legal right to make that copy. I don't have to obtain permission from the publisher or artist, it's up to Apple to ensure the transaction is legal. The understanding is that it's them making the copy, not me.

So how do I know that downloading from iTunes isn't a copyright violation, but downloading for free from the WarezHouse website or from Joe Random over P2P is?

Other than a gut feeling about how reputable the source is, I really don't have a fucking clue, and no chance of getting a fucking clue either. And yet now my entire life - financial situation, lifestyle, criminal record - are at risk if I get it wrong.

Re:Downloading? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917362)

Not the entire world is the USA.

Awesome. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916230)

How long before the general public adopts a "music is caustic" attitude and avoids this shit like the plague it is?

I just can't wait until sales of this crap plummet to zero because everyone and their dog is afraid of either: A) being sued into oblivion, or B) losing their internet rights forever. Then we get to sit and watch the recording industries spin some new fangled excuse as to why absolutely nothing is selling- and for once, sales actually are down- in fact, zero.

Then they can't blame the pirates. The only people left to blame are themselves.

-AC

Legal Weight? (1)

VJmes (2449518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916280)

Any /. lawyers on here care to explain just how legal weight a copyright warning holds?

If someone received a warning from their ISP and were able to track the company responsible for identifying you, how much weight would their supposed evidence hold in a court? I don't know about New Zealand, but hasn't the legal strength of an IP address being used to identify someone been successfully challenged in court before. Furthermore should a user be disconnected by their ISP, could a user then go after one of these IP enforcement mobs for slander or loss of productivity as a result of one of these warnings?

It would be interesting to see the validity of these warnings challenged in court.

Re:Legal Weight? (2)

thoughtfulbloke (1091595) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916384)

Not a Lawyer, am a New Zealander. After the 3rd warning notice the copyright owner can take you (the account holder of the IP address, as they are the one's liable) to the Copyright Tribunal (not a standard court), if they win it is damages in the range $275 to $15000.
For more information see the 3strikes website [3strikes.net.nz] .

Re:Legal Weight? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916438)

Actually that sounds kind of reasonable. When I heard about 3-strikes, I thought it was like the French one, where after the third strike you lose your use of the internet, which is obviously bad.

But in this case it's like a buffer, you have two warnings before they can take you to court. And once they do take you to court, the damages aren't outrageous.....nothing in the millions range like here in the US. Seems like a reasonable solution to the problem......unless you want to get rid of copyright altogether which I don't.

Re:Legal Weight? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916526)

Ahh, here in New Zealand $15000 might as well be millions... It's enough to bankrupt most middle class families with a mortgage and teen age kids.

Re:Legal Weight? (4, Informative)

mudshark (19714) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916858)

It's hardly reasonable. I'm also a Kiwi, and I'll tell you what's wrong with the law:

1) Infringement notices are deemed valid on their face and not subject to review of their methodology.

2) Presumption of guilt on the part of the alleged infringer, which runs counter to the established notion of common law which heretofore held sway in NZ.

3) The tribunal does not have the same procedures as a normal court of law, in spite of its ability to hand down punishment. Rules of evidence and testimony are cut down, and the accused does not have any right to counsel.

4) If and when the tribunal gains the power to order service termination, a wrongly accused individual could lose internet connectivity with no recourse available.

5) The manner in which it was passed (under urgency) was a flagrant abuse of parliamentary procedure, and only a handful of MPs voted against it. Wikileaks has published diplomatic cables which document the meddling input of the US Embassy in crafting and shepherding the legislation, making New Zealand look ever more like a sad little banana republic eager to turn a trick for the rich foreigners.

The law reeks, almost as much as the government which imposed it. God save WB.

Re:Legal Weight? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917030)

After the 3rd warning notice the copyright owner can take you (the account holder of the IP address, as they are the one's liable) to the Copyright Tribunal (not a standard court),.

I guess it's a kangaroo court in more ways than one.

Re:Legal Weight? (1)

sincewhen (640526) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918486)

No, New Zealand does not (natively) have kangaroos, only Australia does.

Re:Legal Weight? (1)

eineerg (2098930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918952)

Kangaroo fucken country, all of our politicians are spouting off about fiscal responsibility when they've pandered to American interests to push through a one sided 'fair trade' agreement which has the potential to see vast amounts of money taken out of our economy and for what? This law is nothing but detrimental for the New Zealand people. (PS i know that pirating=bad but when you see wage stagnation for effectively everyone (lets ignore the 140 something criminals who took home 7.1 billion last year) and all the signs of run away inflation, who really gives a shit.

Re:Legal Weight? (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916478)

Not a lawyer. The first 2 are just notices/warnings that you can challenge, though you have to prove innocence rather than they have to prove guilt (but i guess you would be able to review their logs they are using to accuse you, false accusations will be expensive in terms of wages).

Furthermore should a user be disconnected by their ISP, could a user then go after one of these IP enforcement mobs for slander or loss of productivity as a result of one of these warnings?

Not for any reasonable if any sum of money in NZ. We aren’t big on awarding large damages for anything and you do get two warnings and two months to comply.

And I would expect that the fines for normal circumstances will be under or close 500 unless they can prove the account holder did it.

Re:Legal Weight? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917302)

though you have to prove innocence rather than they have to prove guilt

If you aren't guilty then saying that you are is obviously a lie.
If the RIAZN tell your ISP that you are doing something that you are not then you might have a libel-case against them.

Glad I am not in New Zealand (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916282)

As I have had some of my youtube videos with no music, original video, and me fucking appearing and talking in the video striked as piracy in the past.... (Of course that is resolved, but under this fascist law I am incorrect for publishing MY content just cause some spam monkey troll company thinks so based on a blanket policy).

Fuck that, and fuck you recording industry, don't you get it? you ceased to matter in 1998, it does not take millions of dollars to produce and publish quality recordings any more, and you fail to exist other than a copyright troll, fuck off and die already, unless you really want to produce another limp bizcuit?

When should we hang em high? (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916326)

In the past you hang em high if the crime is particularly hard to prosecute. For example, it is a felony to mess with someone's mail even though mail is typically not valuable.

But in the present, it seems you hang em high if they threaten your business model. Downloading a song might make the RIAA lose pennies on the dollar on average as there is a good chance you wouldn't buy to begin with. Yet they want thousands or millions in compensation?

On the upside... (1)

idbeholda (2405958) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916330)

They're at least cracking down on people with poor taste in music. See below.
"35 for alleged download of songs by R&B star Rihanna, six for Lady Gaga tunes and one for British recording artist Taio Cruz"
And I'm pretty sure that's a typo, it's Lord Caca.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916336)

which came into effect on September 1.

They do have a funny calendar down under.

Re:Huh? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916428)

which came into effect on September 1.

They do have a funny calendar down under.

What? You don't have a September 1 where you are? What day comes after the last day of August then?

When will they ever learn (1)

SlithyMagister (822218) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916380)

The only way to stop this forever is for everyone everywhere to just stop buying music.
Don't buy DVDs of movies. Ever. Go to them in theatres if you must. Then remember what they were like, then do something else with your time instead of watching them over and over. You don't need them. They don't improve your live or your health.

If you must have music that badly, learn to play and instrument. Or two....
Sing! You have have a voice, USE IT.

But for the love of God, stop crying 'cuz they make it tough to steal it. Even as tough as they can possibly make it, it will always be sofa king easy to steal without risking detection even a 20-nothing slashdotter can figure it out. So figure it out, do it and stop whining.

The so-called "associations" that are harassing you exist for the sole purpose of robbing you blind. $20 for a CD???? What could possibly make it worth $20???
But you continue to pay it.
Go into any mall, and the stores are full of people stuffing money into cash registers while their customers walk out with nothing but songs they can hear on the radio for free.

You do have the right to download music.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916388)

You have the right to download if you already own the music (it's just a way to get a CD or whatever into a digital form on your computer).
It is however illegal to upload (distribute) the music, which virtually all P2P (torrent) programs do.

Auto guilty (1)

bryan1945 (301828) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916436)

For the 6 that downloaded Lady Gaga, they should be automatically declared guilty for bad taste.
On the serious side, this "auto-guilty" stance is really going to get out of hand.

Re:Auto guilty (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916536)

"auto-guilty" for this law like speed camera fines will most likely come with fines that amount to a couple of weeks disposable income at most. Proving trivial offences when there is reasonable certainty that you did do it makes it cost more for everyone.

I do think they should change the law to failing to secure your network against copyright infringement though at least that's what they are actually prosecuting you for.

Need to hide your IP address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916486)

I use http://www.cyberdodge.co.nz to hide my IP address. Its torrent capable and fast. You cant get tracked when you use VPNs.

bearing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916518)

Slewing bearing called slewing ring bearings, is a comprehensive load to bear a large bearing, can bear large axial, radial load and overturning moment. http://www.1stbearing.com

Boycott (1)

Endimiao (471532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916528)

Just stop buying those worthless pieces of crap altogether, Downloading? Go ahead, instill the fear of even touching a "legit" product from said names.

And then start actually to take note on the alternatives, such as Jamendo [jamendo.com] and the likes. Go to concerts to support the authors you do enjoy and search good music instead that being popularized by outlets such as MTV.

Only then can true copyright reform begin, and prices drop to affordable levels.

Re:Boycott (1)

Binestar (28861) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918804)

Go to concerts to support the authors you do enjoy and search good music instead that being popularized by outlets such as MTV

MTV does music again? When did this happen?

moD up (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916530)

Come on baby...and +who sell 4nother And shower. For the project to implementation to Correct network FOR MEMBERSHIP.

Live in NZ and ... it's no big deal (fortunately). (4, Interesting)

w0mprat (1317953) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916590)

It's really not a big fuss down here. Since september 1st there has only been a few handfuls of notices dished out, to only high profile artists that make millions for a couple of big labels (Rhianna is signed to Sony Music OTTOMH) are getting a few notices sent out. Largely due to the $25 dollar fee to do so, which has prevented litigious rights-holders from sending thousands of notices as the would if it was like $2. It's also only easy to track peer 2 peer that would likely invoke the infringment notices, being BitTorrent without doing terribly much to hide yourself and services like LimeWire, also rather easy to track what you are doing. So it's also only the easy targets.

I can't count the list of other ways to pirate movies and music, many much less traceable, and can confirm that people have indeed switched to these, if were not using them already.

Add to that it's only three strikes PER rightsholder, and each warning expires after 9 months. As an IT guy when people are asking for my advice, I say if your not downloading much, your downloading obscure shit and not whatever the most popular Miley Cryus torrent is on some public tracker, your very unlikely to get a notice, and when you do, just avoid that rightsholder till the notice expires.

Also if the rights-holder has no history of suing anyone, your even more unlikely to get a notice. NZ also being small fry economically, it's also not terrible lucrative to go after pirates.

By shear fortunate accident of incompetent lawmaking, it's rather neutered and not causing a huge problem... yet. It could have been worse. The whole guilt on accusation is a stilly bit shitty of course. NZers have a way of duly igorning BS laws and carrying on doing what they do.

But I worry, NZ has lost it's testicular fortitude of late. In the 80s the French showed up in the south pacific wanting to test nuclear weapons, even 3000km from New Zealand, the response from NZ was strong and we ultimately suggested an alternate location they could shove their bombs. Hence NZ passing Nuclear-Free laws. If we still had stones like that, we would have told the foreign corporates somewhere dark to keep their law, and perhaps passed a law making piracy all but legal. Shame.

We'll get rid of this stupid law when we grow some stones back.

Re:Live in NZ and ... it's no big deal (fortunatel (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917822)

By shear fortunate accident of incompetent lawmaking, it's rather neutered and not causing a huge problem... yet.

If it's left as is it could be an example of competent law making.

I ticks the boxes: 3 strikes law, allowing rights holders to force IPs to convert IP address into Account holders without a Court order and puts the burden of proof onto the infringer. That sounds pretty strict and scary and might implement all of ACTA.

Yet its about the most toothless piracy law I have seen and you have plain stupid to offend 3 times. It probably costs the rights holders more to use than they will ever gain back. I think if intentional it is sheer brilliance. And we have ISP lobbing to keep it that way, piracy probably accounts for half their profits.

Any Government representative on NZ would turn a blind eye to non-profit copyright infringement while having a law somewhere hidden in the backgroud.

Re:Live in NZ and ... it's no big deal (fortunatel (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919426)

The very issue of turning IP into name and address without a court order is enough to give some shivers.

Re:Live in NZ and ... it's no big deal (fortunatel (1)

eineerg (2098930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37919072)

You seriously believe that the legislation wont be amended in the future? There's already been plenty of speculation that they're going to go light on the first round of infringements in order to negotiate a reduction in processing fee's(the legislation comes up for review within the next year i believe),

Great tips! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916650)

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me

Writing Services [essaywriter.co.uk]

Advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37916854)

Now I know that Taio Cruz exists.

Copyright protection needs to be redefined (2)

NewtonsLaw (409638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37916908)

As outlined here [aardvark.co.nz] , only the completely stupid will be caught by this law.

More important should be a closer look at the raison d'etre for originally creating copyright laws and how that's been corrupted by the movie studios and recording labels with their fat lobbying wallets.

As described in the linked article, it's time copyright protection was scaled back to recognize that if the rights-owner refuses to sell their product to a particular market then there can be no losses associated with its unauthorized distribution. To allow rights-owners to prosecute people for copying that which they would otherwise be happy to pay for but aren't allowed to is a license to extort!

Re:Copyright protection needs to be redefined (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917202)

It's the law that's stupid not the users.
Any law that gives anyone three chances is basically saying "Go ahead and download as much as you like until we have caught you two times".
What if all laws were like this, imagine how fast I would drive if I knew I was going to get let off the first two times for free.
And the chances of you getting caught even twice are probably minuscule based on the number of downloads (millions) versus the number of infringements handed out.
So to all Kiwis, go out and download all you want, what's the worst that can happen?

Re:Copyright protection needs to be redefined (1)

RogerWilco (99615) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917472)

I actually like the definition proposed there. The basic premise is that if a work is for sale, it's illegal to copy it, but if you can't buy it, then there is no copyright infringement.

Might be difficult to prove in court though. It doesn't sound very practical.

If such a law would come into effect, the entertainment industry would probably put their entire back catalog on sale for say a billion dollars a piece. Then technically it would be for sale, just nobody would be able to pay the price. There are probably some other loopholes in the idea as well.

Re:Copyright protection needs to be redefined (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917966)

Totally corrupted.

Part of me laughs that it's Lady Gaga and Rihanna. Not performers I appreciate in any way. On the other hand I am shocked. Of all the artists are those the ones who need protection? Have they not made enough money? This is nothing more than for the rich to make them richer.

Downloading (1)

alendit (1454311) | more than 2 years ago | (#37917324)

Couldn't find information anywhere else, so I'll ask: is the issue here really downloading? Like in downloading over HTTP from, let's say, an 1-click-hoster? If so, how do they even find out? Man-in-the-midlle? Hoster giving out the downloader data? Seems not really plausible to me.

Or is it about torrent, where you not only download, but also upload stuff? No idea, how it is in NZ, but in Europe it is a HUGE difference.

People who download that sort of crap ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37917810)

should be sent to re-programming centers as a matter of urgency. Won't someone please think of the children?

STOP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37918020)

Stop buying their products and services! These people ARE scumbags. They really really are. They would kill you if it got them a dollar. Or at least try to sue you for any reason or no reason at all. And break every rule in the book trying to do it!

Stop buying stuff! Why? Because fuck them thats why! Aren't you tired of their crap yet? Stop buying stuff already!

Tell your friends, tell your family. Stop buying MPAA and RIAA backed products and services. And harp on it as much as you can. Eventually the media mafiaa will hit a critical mass with the number of people who will never give them money again.

And they will wise up and stop being such greedy underhanded dishonest lying cheating scumbags. Or go broke and blow away.

Either way... Problem solved really cheaply.

So get started guys.... Tell them to cram it today! Down with the **aa!

Re:STOP! (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918182)

Too bad the self control of most people under 30 is that of a deranged squirrel in a nut processing plant. They have zero clue as to what good music is, and they cant stop consuming it... gotta gotta gotta, gimmie gimmie gimmie.. good god.

IF you have to watch it or hear it, at least pirate it from a friend that will not rat on you and get a better copy in the process... I.E. borrow someone elses disc and rip it. itunes will rip music effortlessly,. and handbrake 2 versions back also will do this. (current handbrake is crap as they removed decss)

The MPAA is doing it different... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#37918156)

They have snipers that will just go out and shoot possible infringes in the head. and then scream.... I AM THE LAW!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>