New Zealand record industry flubs its first three-strikes prosecution

Discuss

9 Responses to “New Zealand record industry flubs its first three-strikes prosecution”

  1. Itsumishi says:

    One minor correction Cory, it’s earthquakes, not earthquake. There have been two separate big quakes and quite literally hundreds of aftershocks between and since.

    • Kathy Lowry says:

       Actually, there have been 4 quakes over magnitude 6, starting with the 7.1 in September 2010, and about 12000 aftershocks.  The 6.3 in Feb 2011 was the most destructive in terms of building and land damage, and 183 people died. http://www.canterburyquakelive.co.nz/ has some nice graphs if you’re interested.

      • Itsumishi says:

        Man… I didn’t realise there had been quite so many aftershocks. I get regular verbal updates from my mother in law who’s house is one of only a few left occupied on her street in Lyttleton. 

        I guess not all the aftershocks are felt by everyone as she reports about “5 a day’. When she last visited us in Melbourne she said the fact that there were no aftershocks was starting to stress her out. Like she was constantly waiting for a little one and when it kept never arriving the anxiety kicked in and she kept worrying when “it” eventually came it would be big. 

  2. I guess it’s nice to see that politicians in countries other than the USA will do scumbag things to legislation.  This is why I firmly believe in one item per bill; no riders, no earmarks, nothing. 

    • Tony Peguero says:

       Actually, Cory got that bit wrong, and we typically do not see those sorts of shenanigans here in New Zealand. The copyright legislation was not passed as a rider on aything else, although it was initally reported in a way that created that impression. The bill was passed under urgency due to parliament having been put behind schedule by quake related issues. As a result it was not subject to the debate it deserved, but all indications are that it would have passed anyway, despite public opposition.

  3. Yacko says:

    “that each track had probably been downloaded 90 times and therefore the cost should be multiplied by 90″

    Doesn’t the RIAA do the same kind of guesstimate here in the US and has it not withstood court scrutiny? If anything, given what I remember of RIAA court cases here, the number RIANZ claimed was a bargain.

  4. Marko Raos says:

    garbage people
    you meet someone who works in rianc and you say, “hi, garbage!” wtf is this world coming to?

  5. That_Anonymous_Coward says:

    Imagine that… the tech can’t do what they claim it does.
    They turn their “damages” into a laughing stock by inflating the numbers to make it look more serious.

    With this kind of math at play, one wonders if the billions the **AA’s claim to have lost are more like $19.95

  6. chicken on the ceiling says:

    i’m fairly sure this law was passed well before the quakes. i have one strike against ‘me’ already and that was a couple of years ago now.

Leave a Reply