perceptualChaos Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Internet service providers are struggling to deal with a new law requiring them to axe the internet connections of customers who "repeatedly" access pirated material. Section 92A of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act, passed last year, takes effect on February 28. It says ISPs will have to "reasonably implement" a policy to disconnect "in appropriate circumstances" the internet services of users who have repeatedly downloaded or uploaded infringing music, movies, games or other copyright material. ISPs will be required to act on accusations that a user is illegally accessing copyright material. read full article personally I don't think it's such a big deal... I think a lot of ISPs are already doing this anyway - just don't get caught... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Awesome Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 It's pretty bullshit. Fundamentally this legislation sets a legal president in NZ for providers of X service to be held liable for their customers use of it. I find this quite ironic as National was voted in to kick start the New Zealand economy (With a swathe of pro business changes). This seems like a backwards step for providers of services in NZ. By no long extension of this type of law, Car manufactures should be held liable every time someone crashes a car. I can't see utilities companies providing power and water being happy every time someone electrocutes themselves or drowns in a pool in this brave new world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 personally I don't think it's such a big deal... I think a lot of ISPs are already doing this anyway - just don't get caught... Yeah I've had a few emails at work from some American film associations / their legal reps advising that a user from our IP range has been downloading copyright material and that we must instruct them to stop doing that shit or they will be disconnected. Doesn't bother me though, I'd never download copyright material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grind Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 I find this quite ironic as National was voted in to kick start the New Zealand economy (With a swathe of pro business changes). This seems like a backwards step for providers of services in NZ. This is a Labour thing - was being planned halfway through last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perceptualChaos Posted January 26, 2009 Author Share Posted January 26, 2009 (edited) Fundamentally this legislation sets a legal president in NZ for providers of X service to be held liable for their customers use of it. I find this quite ironic as National was voted in to kick start the New Zealand economy (With a swathe of pro business changes). This seems like a backwards step for providers of services in NZ yeah that's a pretty good way of looking at it. Philosophically I mostly agree; it shouldn't be the service provider who is obligated to do anything - and especially without requiring evidence of infringement. Practically however, a lot of ISPs are already doing this because uploading/downloading copyright material infringes on their terms and conditions so I don't think the law really changes anything. I know for sure my ISP (xnet) have been doing this for more than a year. Edited January 26, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grind Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 personally I don't think it's such a big deal... I think a lot of ISPs are already doing this anyway - just don't get caught... ISPs can see with the touch of a button whether you've been web-browsing, sending/receiving email... or using torrents. If you are regularly uploading/downloading data through ports associated with torrents then you're pretty much screwed. THe thing is, they don't have the $ or resource to check everyones internet activity, it'll have to be random / small-scale testing. Would be interesting to hear Catalyst's p.o.v? Offline if necessary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perceptualChaos Posted January 26, 2009 Author Share Posted January 26, 2009 THe thing is, they don't have the $ or resource to check everyones internet activity, it'll have to be random / small-scale testing. They don't have to screen for copyright infringement they just have to respond to complaints from the holders of the copyright material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 They don't have to screen for copyright infringement they just have to respond to complaints from the holders of the copyright material Would be quite easy to log IP's and then send out automated messages in legalese... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pakage Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 ISPs can see with the touch of a button whether you've been web-browsing, sending/receiving email... or using torrents. If you are regularly uploading/downloading data through ports associated with torrents then you're pretty much screwed. using the torrent format as a means of data transfer isnt illegal. its just the content that more often than not is. busting people for simply using torrent data would be like arresting people for smoking cannabis because they were wearing a bob marley t shirt, without having actually seen them smoking any cannabis. I mean, sure they probably do smoke the herb, but you actually gotta catch them in a specific act of breaking the law. They don't have to screen for copyright infringement they just have to respond to complaints from the holders of the copyright material yep. exactly right. its usually the production studios who employ a company who finds a torrent tracker for one of their movies and logs the IP's of people using this tracker to download that specific movie and forwards it to the ISP's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grind Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 They don't have to screen for copyright infringement they just have to respond to complaints from the holders of the copyright material Yeah. So if someone complained about me infringing on copyright, and it was written in my connection logs that I had been using torrent ports, how would you suggest I could've avoided the situation and "not got caught"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 They don't have to screen for copyright infringement they just have to respond to complaints from the holders of the copyright material Yeah. So if someone complained about me infringing on copyright, and it was written in my connection logs that I had been using torrent ports, how would you suggest I could've avoided the situation and "not got caught"? They couldn't really do shit with connection logs, there isn't a static "torrent port" as such, the tracker just links you to seeders designated upload port which is why ISP's cant block out all torrent traffic. When we look at our daily network breakdowns there's a huge chunk of unpublished ports which is obviously all torrent biz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grind Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 Not static, but there's port ranges commonly associated with torrents right? And when you've already been suspected by copyright police aaaand they see you have been uploading/downloading shitloads of data.. you'd be pretty much screwed wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perceptualChaos Posted January 26, 2009 Author Share Posted January 26, 2009 Not static, but there's port ranges commonly associated with torrents right? there's a default port but you can chose a port at random as long as it isn't reserved how would you suggest I could've avoided the situation and "not got caught"? Easiest way to not get caught is to not download stupid shit... the other way is to use a proxy server so they can't trace your IP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 how would you suggest I could've avoided the situation and "not got caught"? Easiest way to not get caught is to not download stupid shit... the other way is to use a proxy server so they can't trace your IP Another option is to use a private tracker such as demonoid. That way they can't see who is downloading what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perceptualChaos Posted January 26, 2009 Author Share Posted January 26, 2009 Another option is to use a private tracker such as demonoid. That way they can't see who is downloading what. yeah although that doesn't stop enforcers from getting a demonoid account by some means, joining a torrent, and logging the IPs of everyone on the torrent. It definitely lowers the probability of getting caught though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Awesome Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I find this quite ironic as National was voted in to kick start the New Zealand economy (With a swathe of pro business changes). This seems like a backwards step for providers of services in NZ. This is a Labour thing - was being planned halfway through last year I know this, but was meaning that its STILL around after national got in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Awesome Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Another option is to use a private tracker such as demonoid. That way they can't see who is downloading what. yeah although that doesn't stop enforcers from getting a demonoid account by some means, joining a torrent, and logging the IPs of everyone on the torrent. It definitely lowers the probability of getting caught though. The data isn't encrypted (much), and passes through US ISPs servers so its not secure. The best thing to do is use peer guardian, don't download off public trackers, and force RC4 encryption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Another option is to use a private tracker such as demonoid. That way they can't see who is downloading what. yeah although that doesn't stop enforcers from getting a demonoid account by some means, joining a torrent, and logging the IPs of everyone on the torrent. It definitely lowers the probability of getting caught though. The data isn't encrypted (much), and passes through US ISPs servers so its not secure. The best thing to do is use peer guardian, don't download off public trackers, and force RC4 encryption. Or go to the video store and rent a VHS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Known One Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 shot Grind... yea, the law has it's major flaws in terms of being very vague (which is good for us all really). 1. ISP's are only required to implement a process by which they respond to complaints and disconnect users. 2. The laws around what traffic has to be logged are still the same as always: every TCP Packet's destination IP and Source IP has to be logged (Not sure about port) for something like 2 years (Could be wrong about the duration). So this bascially means that most ISP's only bother to keep very minimal logs about user's data usage after a certain point. The work done to investigate a copyright infringment notice is in some cases as simple as this... 1: Make sure the infringment notice contains reference to relevant New Zealand Law. 2: Check IP address to ensure it's a customer, find that Customer from IP. For real, thats usually it. If the Customer kicks up a fuss, then sure more investigation may be done, but it's not usual to receive a bogus notice. My advise is not to worry about it. The penalties (if any) would be usually directed at an ISP under this law, for ignoring infringment notices. The worst that happens to a user is that they have to setup an ISP account somewhere else on another ISP who couldn't care less why you left your old ISP. To avoid the infringment notices you can do a lot which people have already discussed. My extra 2c is this though, the law doesn't only get joe bloggs kicked off his ISP for torrenting... it could get someone booted off their ISP for hosting a webpage with a Song you made on it... so for artists in general the law protects you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. MuN Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I have a few issues with this proposed law though, in businesses that have shared internet access (like schools, libraries, etc) makes it difficult to track the originating source of the download unless you have decent money for infrastructure (we are in a recession after all). You are guilty upon accusation, which is just bullshit. What happens when the ISP disconnects a business upon accusation? They risk getting sued by the company for loss of trade and income, especially how there are cases published about how devices (such as network printers) have been shown as false positives before. I don't think many ISPs want to be forced in to this situation, and as someone said before I know some ISPs already do police their network and send cease and desist letters to high data users who are abusing their service. Whats the difference between capturing audio from someones myspace using something like Audacity (isn't this copyright infringement too?). This law also does nothing to stop people transferring copyright material through CDs, flash drives, etc. While I think artists do need to protect themselves to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads, I don't think this is a suitable option for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Known One Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 You should have a read of this document... this is not the law, merely a code of practice submitted by industry http://www.tcf.org.nz/library/2e53bf81-d6c4-4735-9ed0-740e8b2c6af3.cmr Library and Schools are in their own right an ISP (termed as 'Downstream ISP') if they comply with section 92A of the Act also (Terminate users). If they can't afford the infrastructure then they could dispute the notice, ignore the notice (admit guilt) and/or lock down everyones access more and hope it doesn't happen again. The suggestion that people are guilty on accusation is wrong. It's just fact that most people are in fact guilty. Users have ample chance to dispute a notice, people do it all the time here... none so far have been successful in their arguments as most people try to say that they never did it... which the IP logs dispute. Ignorance is not a defense. devices (such as network printers) have been shown as false positives before lol what? link please... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now