New Zealand Reintroduces 3 Strikes Law 165
An anonymous reader writes "The New Zealand government has reintroduced a newly rewritten addition to the Copyright Act which will allow rights' holders to send copyright notices to ISPs, and force them to pass them on to account holders. Section 92A of the Copyright Act will allow rights holders to take people who have been identified as infringers more than three times in front of a Copyright Tribunal. This law will allow the Copyright Tribunal to hand down either a $15,000 fine or six months internet disconnection. The law specifies that the account holder himself is responsible for what is downloaded via the account, and doesn't make allowances for identifying the actual copyright infringer if there are multiple computers tied to an account."
Aw, piss. (Score:4, Informative)
There goes any hope of migrating to New Zealand once I become financially independent.
$15,000NZ is just the maximum (Score:5, Informative)
As much as I despise three strikes laws like this, at least this legislation has judicial oversight and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. As I understand, there will be a fee associated fo lodging and infringement notice, so it won't be a free for all for the MPAA or RIAA (or their NZ counterparts). However, penalties for false notices haven't been addressed yet, although organisations like the Creative Freedom Foundation [creativefreedom.org.nz] are pushing to have this addressed before it becomes law.
Re:I don't know about that.. (Score:1, Informative)
The fact that they weren't able to use the word "breasts" in THAT article, to me, implies that New Zeeland is a completely fucked up place.
The link is ".co.uk" so you've obviously got the wrong country, mate.
Re:Aw, piss. (Score:5, Informative)
Oh don't worry. THEY will lobby/bribe 3 strikes laws into existence pretty much everywhere.
Know your enemy. "THEY" are the International Intelectual Property Alliance (IIPA) [iipa.com], and they have the full political clout [ustr.gov] of the US government behind them - working to subvert democratic process in just about every country in the world [iipa.com] via three strikes/no presumption of innocence for the sheeple. As one small example of many, check out their recent "report" on Spain [iipa.com]. Witness the resulting [expatica.com] political clout [latimes.com] and of course, the result they were after with local laws against P2P [slashdot.org]. Spain is the 8th largest economy in the world - not so easy to boss around if unwilling to cooperate. UK, France appear to be more than happy to bend over for IIPA without any fight - at least Spain managed to keep judicial process in the loop, for now at least.
All of it does not bode well for tiny countries like NZ that do not stand much chance against combined international coercion from the "IIPA Club".
Re:Aw, piss. (Score:4, Informative)
So there you go. This is at least part of the entry fee NZ used for this trade agreement. What coercion did IIPA use on Singapore, Chile, Brunei Darussalam, Australia, Peru and Vietnam? Check for yourself if you dare... but don't expect anything pretty.
Re:Aw, piss. (Score:4, Informative)
"IIPA testifies in support of the initiation of negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement (TPP FTA) with Singapore, Chile, New Zealand, Brunei Darussalam, Australia, Peru and Vietnam." PDF Link [iipa.com].
From IIPA's blessing for NZ on the trade agreement: "Specific problems in some of the TPP countries are outlined in the Special 301 reports from 2009 for Chile [iipa.com], Peru [iipa.com], Brunei [iipa.com], and Vietnam [iipa.com]".
Where "specific problems" mean: No three strikes laws, no trade deal.
Cue slashdot posting "Chile/Peru/Brunei/Vietnam introduces 3 Strikes Law" in 3...2....
Resistance is futile.
Re:Better than the UK (Score:5, Informative)
It's not a conventional "3 strike" process which is based on Guilt Upon Accusation, this is a tribunal system (as you asked, an extension of the existing Copyright Tribunal) to deal with copyright infringement online. If you have any questions about this let me know. Cheers.
Re:Horribly biased, unfair legislation (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Better than the UK (Score:3, Informative)
It's like New Zealand's Disputes Tribunal.
It's a new division of the existing Copyright Tribunal which is a government-run body, but it will need new staff. The existing head of the Copyright Tribunal is Susy Frankel, who you can learn more about here [creativefreedom.org.nz].
The Copyright Tribunal, like the Disputes Tribunal, is a lighter-weight process than a court but it has considerably fewer sanctions available (tribunals at a maximum can go to $15k, whereas courts can go to millions). Read more here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_New_Zealand#Judiciary [wikipedia.org]