Clare has been wary of this law ever since it's been introduced. Labour did vote for it -- hell Labour introduced the bill a few years ago -- and while plenty of us have given her flak for it, that's the party line. Clare, individually, has been one of few MPs to even consider the idea that this is a stupid law (or that copyright itself needs reforming).
For more Parliament laughs, here's a video of Minister Simon Power when MP Gareth Hughes questioned him on the law. See if you can count all the weasel statements:
Oh the government was definitely warned of this. I listed it as a possibility in the submission I sent to the "discussion" committee last year, as did many others.
They knew. The issue is, as the Wikileaks cables show, our government has no intention of letting things like public outcry or technical hurdles get in the way of pleasing the US lobbyists.
The other half couldn't find the "Start" button in Windows XP.
We have the RIANZ, local RIAA knock-off, and NZFACT. But they're effectively in league with the US & international orgs, as evidenced by the MPAA giving a submission at the committee hearing on this law.
There's a lot of people believing that this whole thing was pushed through on pressure from the US, whether ACTA, the TPP, or both.
No, she didn't delete it. She made some half-claim about the composer being a friend, but other than that she hasn't commented on it. A reporter on the news asked her about it last night and she gave a standard 'no comment' answer.
"Here, the negligence claim is used to go after anyone who did not secure their internet connection to prevent such usage. That seems like a huge stretch, and I can't see that getting very far. There's simply no proactive requirement that anyone secure their internet connection to prevent any infringement from happening over it"
They're making this part of the 3-strikes law down here in New Zealand. Even after we all pointed out to our MPs how moronic a policy this is, some clowns that have never touched a router can tell us that we should take steps to make sure our wifi can't be used for 'criminal activity'.
"If Leahy is going to insist that these numbers are factual, shouldn't he at least have to say where he got those numbers from -- and also avoid relying on numbers from the very industries this law is designed to help?
So, what are the chances that Senator Leahy will put forth the details that prove why he needs to censor the internet to protect a few companies who don't want to adapt to a changing market?"
Yeah evidently democracy doesn't work that way anymore. Our local lobbyist fanboy slash justice minister pulled the same number when they were ramming through the three-strikes nonsense down here. I did ask him, twice, to verify those numbers from objective sources.
To his credit he did actually respond to me in detail both times, but neither response had any more content besides the standard REPEAT ORIGINAL CLAIMS tactic.
In short, no, they don't have evidence and evidence isn't the point. They've got lobbyist money telling them what to do.
Unlike the US, Spain has a strong history of revolutionary sentiment, including several very active anarchist, syndicalist and socialist movements.
While I doubt this particular instance of exporting laws favorable to the oligarchs would be enough for the CNT-FAI to kick off another love-fest I don't know, but I wouldn't set the Spanish people's BS meter anywhere near as high as the US or most other European countries, for that matter.
So the Bill of Rights is important enough to uphold within our borders, just not important enough to extend - even to US citizens - outside them, even if "outside" is a technicality. Apparently your rights as a citizen stop at the border, huh?
Wow. This is the kind of thing I point to when people ask me why I moved out of the US and why I won't be coming back. Land of the Free my ass.
This policy is noxious for the sake of being noxious. If I want to get "contraband information" past the border, all I'm going to do is put it on Dropbox or something similar (plenty of options here) and then access it once my clean laptop gets past your idiot guards.
Or just delete GRUB from the MBR and boot into a dummy Windows install that can't recognize the hidden ext4 partition.
Another pointless and hypocritical policy brought to you by our government of Freedom and Change.
By "adults" I think you mean the particular strain of cultural throwbacks that think corporate office culture is the exemplar of how society should work, or think that being a pure WASP in an idealized nuclear family (in image at least) is the perfect politician.
I like the idea of this being the first generation that won't have that as an option. I'm all for moral decrepitude when the morals are stupid.
I don't see any real problem with technology and those using it making nations accountable for their actions.
Once every nation is at risk of having their secrets blasted all over the internet, maybe they'll get the picture. Anything that encourages this politicking over "national interests" to go away can't be bad.
I don't see what's wrong with making modern nations live up to the ideals they espouse, instead of giving democracy lip service and then using "The Prince" as an operating manual anyway.
We have a fairly popular newscaster down here that has been doing that for awhile now. But the community tends to be closer-knit in general so I don't know if that's really exceptional to note.
For most of these people, the actual politics or economics don't enter into the picture. "Marxist" or "Communist" translates to "things I don't like" or "things that are different from my preference".
It's not at all unusual for these types (read: corporate worshipful) to point to anything that moves away from Big Centralized Business as "Communist".
It's just another shade of tribalism. We like things this way, and that's how they should be.
Clare has been wary of this law ever since it's been introduced. Labour did vote for it -- hell Labour introduced the bill a few years ago -- and while plenty of us have given her flak for it, that's the party line. Clare, individually, has been one of few MPs to even consider the idea that this is a stupid law (or that copyright itself needs reforming).
For more Parliament laughs, here's a video of Minister Simon Power when MP Gareth Hughes questioned him on the law. See if you can count all the weasel statements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlHJgVYSkTY
Oh the government was definitely warned of this. I listed it as a possibility in the submission I sent to the "discussion" committee last year, as did many others.
They knew. The issue is, as the Wikileaks cables show, our government has no intention of letting things like public outcry or technical hurdles get in the way of pleasing the US lobbyists.
The other half couldn't find the "Start" button in Windows XP.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Copying the argument
Time to sue Google, James. I hear they link to every goddamn thing on the internet, and never ask anybody.
You can pay for the suit with your fake money.
In other news, US courts say psychological harm to children entails freaking out their idiot parents.
Re: Re:
We have the RIANZ, local RIAA knock-off, and NZFACT. But they're effectively in league with the US & international orgs, as evidenced by the MPAA giving a submission at the committee hearing on this law.
There's a lot of people believing that this whole thing was pushed through on pressure from the US, whether ACTA, the TPP, or both.
Re:
@ FUD
No, she didn't delete it. She made some half-claim about the composer being a friend, but other than that she hasn't commented on it. A reporter on the news asked her about it last night and she gave a standard 'no comment' answer.
"Here, the negligence claim is used to go after anyone who did not secure their internet connection to prevent such usage. That seems like a huge stretch, and I can't see that getting very far. There's simply no proactive requirement that anyone secure their internet connection to prevent any infringement from happening over it"
They're making this part of the 3-strikes law down here in New Zealand. Even after we all pointed out to our MPs how moronic a policy this is, some clowns that have never touched a router can tell us that we should take steps to make sure our wifi can't be used for 'criminal activity'.
End result: wifi will be going away.
"If Leahy is going to insist that these numbers are factual, shouldn't he at least have to say where he got those numbers from -- and also avoid relying on numbers from the very industries this law is designed to help?
So, what are the chances that Senator Leahy will put forth the details that prove why he needs to censor the internet to protect a few companies who don't want to adapt to a changing market?"
Yeah evidently democracy doesn't work that way anymore. Our local lobbyist fanboy slash justice minister pulled the same number when they were ramming through the three-strikes nonsense down here. I did ask him, twice, to verify those numbers from objective sources.
To his credit he did actually respond to me in detail both times, but neither response had any more content besides the standard REPEAT ORIGINAL CLAIMS tactic.
In short, no, they don't have evidence and evidence isn't the point. They've got lobbyist money telling them what to do.
Re: Revolucion
Unlike the US, Spain has a strong history of revolutionary sentiment, including several very active anarchist, syndicalist and socialist movements.
While I doubt this particular instance of exporting laws favorable to the oligarchs would be enough for the CNT-FAI to kick off another love-fest I don't know, but I wouldn't set the Spanish people's BS meter anywhere near as high as the US or most other European countries, for that matter.
Good that copyright law is protecting the works of these poor creators from filthy pirates.
And I'm glad dead authors can keep on making a living while telling me what I can't read. Another win for the moral virtues of monopoly.
Ignoring data to scream about your personal beliefs is the whole point of the internet. Besides porn.
Somebody should show this to Harlan Ellison.
So the Bill of Rights is important enough to uphold within our borders, just not important enough to extend - even to US citizens - outside them, even if "outside" is a technicality. Apparently your rights as a citizen stop at the border, huh?
Wow. This is the kind of thing I point to when people ask me why I moved out of the US and why I won't be coming back. Land of the Free my ass.
This policy is noxious for the sake of being noxious. If I want to get "contraband information" past the border, all I'm going to do is put it on Dropbox or something similar (plenty of options here) and then access it once my clean laptop gets past your idiot guards.
Or just delete GRUB from the MBR and boot into a dummy Windows install that can't recognize the hidden ext4 partition.
Another pointless and hypocritical policy brought to you by our government of Freedom and Change.
By "adults" I think you mean the particular strain of cultural throwbacks that think corporate office culture is the exemplar of how society should work, or think that being a pure WASP in an idealized nuclear family (in image at least) is the perfect politician.
I like the idea of this being the first generation that won't have that as an option. I'm all for moral decrepitude when the morals are stupid.
I don't see any real problem with technology and those using it making nations accountable for their actions.
Once every nation is at risk of having their secrets blasted all over the internet, maybe they'll get the picture. Anything that encourages this politicking over "national interests" to go away can't be bad.
I don't see what's wrong with making modern nations live up to the ideals they espouse, instead of giving democracy lip service and then using "The Prince" as an operating manual anyway.
They backtraced it, and reported them to the cyber police and the state police. You done goofed.
We have a fairly popular newscaster down here that has been doing that for awhile now. But the community tends to be closer-knit in general so I don't know if that's really exceptional to note.
For most of these people, the actual politics or economics don't enter into the picture. "Marxist" or "Communist" translates to "things I don't like" or "things that are different from my preference".
It's not at all unusual for these types (read: corporate worshipful) to point to anything that moves away from Big Centralized Business as "Communist".
It's just another shade of tribalism. We like things this way, and that's how they should be.
As much as Kiwis like the idea of being independent from America, the gov't damn sure goes out of its way to bend over for that corporate money.
It's the damndest thing.
Re: This is a business model...
Funny enough, we can't access Rhapsody in New Zealand because of copyright licensing limitations.
Woops.