People seem to forget that BIG CONTENT is not the only people to hold copyright. I can easily claim that she downloaded one of my original songs, original stories or perhaps a photo I took.

I have copyrights as well, as, I assume, do the average New Zealander.

Sooo, get some New Zealand buddies and start filing grievances. And if they don’t get their access terminated, sounds like you’ve got some sort of discrimination lawsuit, or further grist for protecting those that do.

We have those, they’re called politicians.

Quite interesting – I think the noise around the three strike system will gain a lot more momentum once it is bought into play in the USA, Canada, the UK and Europe

Seems to me it’s time to make three unsubstantiated claims of copyright infringement against Ms. Judith Tizard, so she can experience, first hand, what it is she’s proposing for everyone else, no?

I’m surprised nobody did that at the meeting… I mean, really, is it that difficult to have three people each stand up and say, “Minister, I accuse you of copyright infringement”?

Since no proof is required, it is a simple matter to deprive them from their internet access. Why not? Will they be immune? Why should they be?

Since no proof is required, it is a simple matter to deprive them from their internet access. Why not? Will they be immune? Why should they be?

To make a false accusation with intent to harm is slander/libel, and possibly perjury. Only the rich can get these cases prosecuted, so the rich are immune from this law.

If you don’t know about creative commons then it is time that governments did… and used it freely as a tool for digital freedom.

Also FWIW Judith Tizard is the same person that recently started in train an explicit copyright exemption for satire and parody.

But the accusation can be made and then apologized for. The law doesn’t call for there to be any follow up does it? What does the law actually call for to make the accusation stick?

Accuse, apologize.

And, while Judith is generally responsible for copyright issues in this government (and tabled the Copyright Amendment Bill – the same one admitted was “as good as it could be”), she’s not the “copyright minister”. There’s no such official portfolio. She’s the Associate Minister of Commerce (as well as the MP for my electorate – Auckland Central).

I’ve the vaguest of impressions that the minister in charge of the Internet might see things differently.

Uhh, well, David Cunliffe was at the meeting. And held the same position as Judith Tizard. So, no, unfortunately.

Dugg this, link given below.
Thanks.

http://digg.com/music/Three_strikes_ISP_rule_that_should_cut_both_ways

Of course the effect of the accusations should be immediatly, while the politician has of course the possibility to go to court against them and waiting some years till the court will decide. False accusations of course can not be taken as crime, they are simply errors that can happen.

And if they do not like it, well it is not our problem. The people will have to do something against politicians corrupted by the entertainment industry, right?

Ingo.