3 ms·

This law is sort of interesting. I don't think anyone came out particularly happy with it. If I remember correctly it was sort of pushed upon us by US pressure

by Nition 10y ago

This law is sort of interesting. I don't think anyone came out particularly happy with it. If I remember correctly it was sort of pushed upon us by US pressure so the legislators didn't really like it, it added extra work so the ISPs didn't like it, as a result of that the law has a $25 fee for administering a "strike" to someone, which the copyright holders don't like because they can't so blindly send out mass strikes. The strikes also expire after 9 months. And obviously the people don't like it either. The maximum fine is capped at $15,000NZD (~$11,000USD) and the average fine in practice has apparently been around $500NZD (~$350USD). As of 22 November 2013 17 people had got their three strikes and received their fines[1]. I wonder what the total is now. Re actually cutting off your Internet access though, I'm not sure. Thing is, that was temporarily in there and was later removed, as Section 92A in the Copyright Act. You can see it marked as [Repealed][2]. But then section 122B seems to say your Internet can still get cut off. Maybe someone can shed some light on that one. [1] https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawtalk/lawtalk-archives/issue-832/infringing-file-sharing-two-years-on https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawtalk/lawtalk-archives/issue... [2] http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1994/0143/latest/DLM345634.html http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1994/0143/latest/D...

xupybd 10y ago
It would seem that the ISPs had a significant compliance cost as well. "On 23 July 2012, despite the policy intent of making the issuance of copyright infringement notices under the legislation inexpensive, Telecom New Zealand revealed that under the new regime, it had cost them $534,416 to issue only 1,238 notices - or approximately $438 per notice, although this cost figure is not evidenced by any audited breakdown. The copyright holders are required to pay a fee of $25 to have the notices issued"[1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_(Infringing_File_Sharing)_Amendment_Act_2011#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_(Infringing_File_Sha...
- Nition 10y ago
  I feel like Telecom may have been boosting the numbers a bit there to try and make the law seem extra bad for them; all they should really have to do is forward a letter.
  - MichaelGG 10y ago
    If they didn't already have a database in place of which IPs assigned to which customers during which times, they'd need to set that up. Software dev isn't cheap. Maintenance isn't cheap. They need to write up a procedure on how to handle these notices. They have to verify they're valid (i.e. not just a prank or malicious action). Compliance costs can add up.
    - xupybd 10y ago
      Also never underestimate the costs incurred by sufficiently bloated bureaucracy.
      - lostlogin 10y ago
        You've worked for a university too?
    - vacri 10y ago
      Well said. These things, especially at the government/enterprise level, aren't just a quick and dirty forwarding rule on your mailserver. It's got to be written up, vetted by legal, documented so knowledge transfers through staff transfer, so on and so forth. The action is simple, but implementation is not.

by Nition 10y ago

xupybd 10y ago

It would seem that the ISPs had a significant compliance cost as well. "On 23 July 2012, despite the policy intent of making the issuance of copyright infringement notices under the legislation inexpensive, Telecom New Zealand revealed that under the new regime, it had cost them $534,416 to issue only 1,238 notices - or approximately $438 per notice, although this cost figure is not evidenced by any audited breakdown. The copyright holders are required to pay a fee of $25 to have the notices issued"[1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_(Infringing_File_Sharing)_Amendment_Act_2011#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_(Infringing_File_Sha...

Nition 10y ago
I feel like Telecom may have been boosting the numbers a bit there to try and make the law seem extra bad for them; all they should really have to do is forward a letter.
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  If they didn't already have a database in place of which IPs assigned to which customers during which times, they'd need to set that up. Software dev isn't cheap. Maintenance isn't cheap. They need to write up a procedure on how to handle these notices. They have to verify they're valid (i.e. not just a prank or malicious action). Compliance costs can add up.
  - xupybd 10y ago
    Also never underestimate the costs incurred by sufficiently bloated bureaucracy.
    - lostlogin 10y ago
      You've worked for a university too?
  - vacri 10y ago
    Well said. These things, especially at the government/enterprise level, aren't just a quick and dirty forwarding rule on your mailserver. It's got to be written up, vetted by legal, documented so knowledge transfers through staff transfer, so on and so forth. The action is simple, but implementation is not.