Xiroth writes "More details are beginning to come out about the lawsuit launched by film studios in Australia. According to law experts familiar with the case, the studios seek to force the ISPs to become 'police, judge, and executioner,' effectively giving the studios the legal clout to switch off ISP customers' internet connection at will. Apparently the ISP iiNet is the unlucky victim for the test case as, unlike other ISPs, they refused to pass on infringement notices to their customers."
I'm liking the sound of these iiNet people - they were the ones who wanted to say a big 'screw you' to the proposed government censorship scheme, too. Any Aussies care to comment on whether they're actually the good guys or not?
I'm not an Aussie, but I think it's unproductive (and often counter-productive) to try to label companies or people as "good" or "bad." This particular action appears to be good. Nuff said.
You don't think 'good' and 'bad' are helpful adjectives to describe a company to a friend who might be interesting in purchasing services from said company and who will eventually need to deal with said company?
Two examples, Comcast and Netlix. I've read quite a bit actions that both companies have taken, and have been on the phone with both companies several times. If I were referring a friend for a high-speed internet service, I probably wouldn't recommend Comcast because I think that they are a 'bad' company. They do things like throttle your internet connection if you're using bit-torrent, regardless if it's for completely legal purposes or not. They are lobbying for a tiered internet. They are rarely pleasant or on time to service calls, and calling their customer service center is an exercise in futility.
Netflix, on the other hand, I would recommend as a 'good' company, because they are constantly doing things that bennefit their customers. For example, they have been working very hard to bring streaming movies to people. I just got that ability with the latest xbox update, and it's awesome (really good quality too). They are also very good on the phone. The CSRs will really try to help you, and if you have some sort of technical question, they put you on the phone with somebody who understands and can answer your question!
So, in short, I think that labeling companies as 'good' and 'bad' is helpful. If a company is falling into the 'bad' category, and they don't want to be there, then they need to get off their ass and figure out what put them there.
Precisely. A quick read through consumeraffairs.org shows that some companies trend "good" and some trend "bad". Like Honda is good, and Hyundai is bad. (I had to get that car analogy in there.);-)
The quotes hold, though. It is wicked and disgraceful to convince people not to provide for their own protection. In a world with predators, the unarmed are known as prey.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a FREE country..."
I call bullshit.
As I recently heard Lessig point out, the US government is less popular with its constituents these days than it was preceding the American revolution. Your economy is circling the drain. You have massive and growing separation of the rich and poor. You've had almost a decade of politicians shitting on your rights and your founding principles.
The time for you to mobilise your well-regulated militia was long ago. And you know what happened? Nothing.
It's about time you stopped being so naïve. It's clear the governments of developed and developing nations have no greater fear of a population of gun nuts than of flower-wielding hippies. Neither community will sacrifice their bread and circuses so long as they can vote for a new guy in the next election. Fair and transparent democracy is the best and most natural defence of a free nation, not the possibility of slaughtering a stack of your fellow countrymen in the name of revolution. All that gets you is the sort of political stability we see in Niger and Darfur.
The individuals who joined the collective weren't really evil people. The Borg will assimilate anyone. But once they become part of the collective mindset, they have one goal, and that goal can really only be achieved in an evil way.
Corporations tend to work the same way. Most of the individuals are not evil, but they contribute toward a whole that is going in an evil direction. Some time it is tough to take a step back and go "if I do this, they could use it for something else..." I always wonder who was the jerk who wrote the "virus" that went on the Sony BMG music CD's that disabled the ability to burn CDs as a form of copy protection. Surely that person knew what he/she was doing was wrong. But in other cases it is more gray. The same tools can be used for good or evil. And if evil makes you more profit, well.. that is what happens.
Internode and iiNet are the two awesome ISPs in this country, although there are lots of smaller ones. You'll want to avoid the ISPs that charge $180/GB on any of their plans for excess usage such as Telstra, Dodo or Optus. This is not a typo. That's 180 Australian Dollars for every Gigabyte you go over your allowance. For example, Optus's 'Yes Fusion $79 plan comes with 4 GB and $150 for every Gigabyte over that. Needless to say, they've got their had stuck up so far their own bottom that they can see daylight through their own ears. But even they completely oppose the plan.
A certain Mark Newton who works for Internode is also an extremely outspoken critic of the censorship plan. But Telstra, iiNet and Internode, likely 3 out of the biggest 5 ISPs all have important people saying that the filtering won't work [zdnet.com.au].
Broadband Choice [whirlpool.net.au] is an excellent overview of the choices out there. Check out Whirlpool [whirlpool.net.au] if you want to know more about the situation.
I left Australia coming up on 2 years ago, so maybe things have changed, but Optus cable always seemed very good to me. Speeds were consistently reasonable (approx 10Mbit down, 1.5Mbit up), price was $69.95 a month, and it was capped to 12GB a month (with a "bonus" 24GB for offpeak, so if I wanted to download something big, I'd do it off peak, giving me effectively 36GB a month if managed properly). Only downloads were counted towards the limit - uploads were unlimited. If I went over the limit (the 12GB
They are probably testing the waters with one ISP to get precedent that they can use against other ISP's. It looks from the article that they are the third largest ISP in the region. They probably don't want to go after the bigger ones first but they don't want to tackle a small ISP as well. I would guess this is just the first step in setting up a system for their benifit.
> What I'm wondering is why iiNet is the *only* ISP getting sued.
Because they stood up to the studios. Rather than kicking people offline, they forwarded the complaints to the cops because they had no intention of pretending to be policemen.
The summary is inaccurate on that point: they did NOT ignore the complaints. In fact, there are police in the same building as them, so they forwarded all those complaints over to them. The fact that the police did nothing is another matter, but perfectly understandable given the kind of "evidence" they're usually supplied with, especially when there are more important crimes to prosecute.
Anyhow, the studios obviously want to make an example out of the only ISP who isn't willing to play along with their power grabs in order to convince the others to be more compliant.
Is there anything we can do to play hardball with the record companies at this point? I'm tired of simply sitting down and not buying their music and supporting companies and organizations which oppose them with periodic donations.
I'd propose a CD burning party, but first of all, it's a little too "third reich" for me to be totally comfortable with, and second, half the people would show up with laptops and blank discs.
Well, if by "like Canada" he means it is a sovereign nation, has a large land area, is resource-rich, and sells a lot of its stuff to the US, then he's only being deceptive and can't be caught in an outright falsehood. China's not very much like Canada in most ways, though. Even a superficial glance at the news coverage from each country could tell you that.
This is an ages old trick of the trade for con artists and fraudsters. A con tells his mark something that's worded very ambiguously. He makes sure what
It might be a good idea to practice saying it. This is a test case and Australia hasn't been too pro-customer from what I've seen lately. Does anyone have any links or data that could link this case to US government, RIAA, MPAA, or any of their legal teams?
Maybe group-sourcing will work to find something to help the fight.
Is that if they have enough evidence to make you get shut off the net, they have enough evidence to sue you. Stop passing the buck and file a lawsuit, jackasses.
They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.
So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.
No, it means the MAFIAA authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent people from pirating movies and TV shows. Don't expose their failed logic; use it against them.
So an eyewitness is as guilty as the perpetrator?
So General Motors and their dealerships are responsible for thousands of instances of vehicular manslaughter?
I'm sorry, I don't think I like "authorized by failing to prevent" as a legal precedence.
Do everything you can to be suspicious without violating any laws. Download dozens of distrobutions of Linux, send massive files to your friends anything to get yourself noticed. Then, when they cut off your access, complain and complain and keep complaining until they either give in or give up.
Seriously, these test cases exist for a reason, show the ISP how much business it will cost them, show the government how many false positives they will get. It can't hurt and (if they aren't a buch of corrupt fools) it could help.
That's a good tactic, but it only works if you have an ISP that is limiting access (like Comcast). My ISP is Verizon and they apparently don't care what I download, even though I'm maxing out my line at 100 KB/s.
But if Verizon started limiting my access based on content, then yes I think bit-torrenting millions of copies of Linus sounds like a good method of protest. I could then sue Verizon on the grounds that they are blocking my LEGAL access to public domain and free-to-download software.
Yep, but I'll be even more impressed when they invent little tiny robots to clean the cholesterol out of my arteries. That way I can eat artery-clogging pizza and not feel guilty about it!
I think the whole point is that iiNet isn't doing that sort of thing.
iiNet, and the industry body, the Internet Industry Association, say ISPs should not be required to take action against any customers until they have been found guilty of an offence by the courts.
Saturating your internet connection isn't going to affect a court case one way or the other.
If anything, iiNet customers should write to their ISP to thank them for going to bat for sane copyright enforcement.
No. The most-likely problem is the ISP will try to block bittorrent usage. Even for legal downloads like Linux. As a form of protest, you then attempt to grab lots and lots of copies of Linux (via bittorrent) as a way to protest, and sue the company on the grounds that they are blocking legal access to free software and violating contract/neutrality.
First they government wants to set up a nationwide firewall [gizmodo.com], now this? WTF is going on down there? I mean, I thought the *U.S.* was bad. Isn't Australia supposed to be all European open and sophisticated, unlike us puritanical Americans?
what would you have them do? Australia is full of criminals, and these are reasonable actions to keep them corralled. A bunch of people walking around with bad attitudes, large knives, and strange accents talking about barbies and mates and dingos. I'm just glad they are a continent unto themselves.
"Think of the CHILDREN! Won't somebody pleeeeease think of the CHILDREN?!?"
Australia itself is not at fault, neither is the majority of the population who would be quite content to continue being a bastion of open-minded free thinking (much like most of Canada, which I'm proud to live in). No, if there's any blame to assign here, it should be directed squarely at the two groups at fault: Greedy, amoral media executives who would be all too happy to set up a global dictature where their content, flawed and awful as it might get, would be rewarded with mountains of ill-gotten cash
Don't forget the US Free Trade Agreement our government signed us up for. Thanks for that. Now we get to have DMCA like rules, MAFIAA/RIAA browbeating and destruction of our medical system by "Big Pharma".
The E.U. is hardly open. I mean, you can't even wear an attractive Swastika pin without getting arrested by the polizei. Where's the freedom in that?;-)
But seriously there are a lot of ways that the E.U. is less free than America. Particularly in the area of self-defense against criminals (you cannot). The taxes are ridiculously high (60 cents/gallon versus $4/gallon) and overall just a more-restrictive society.
Sorry sir, As a native Australian, i must inform you that you are off your rocker.
While both of our cultures have European roots, they've both been equally influenced by the US. Saying that NZ is more "European" just shows that you hold it (and Europe) in higher regard than the US and Australia. Your comparisons, from what i can see, aren't even remotely accurate..
Please note that I actually think New Zealand is a lovely place, i just think you're romanticising a bit.
for a select few major players in the rarefied business of media distribution, circa 1988
now, any pimply faced teenager with a net connection has more distribution power than time warner and bertelsmann in 1988. but the law hasn't changed to reflect that technological change in last 20 years
now, those dying business powers wish to use the laws meant for their private little club to impose their will on a billion teenagers. a billion poor meda hungry teenagers with obfuscation, encryption, spoofing, etc., at their disposal
Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion, and someone searching for stories about Australia is unlikely to include "Oz" in their search.
Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion, and someone searching for stories about Australia is unlikely to include "Oz" in their search.
Oh....that explains why no one thought to ask the wizard for help.
It's possible to lay-down 15 exemptions, and thereby keep the paycheck garnishment to a minimum. On Apirl 15 you will then be handed a bill of ~$10,000 by the IRS which you can choose not to pay.
The IRS will come after you of course, but Henry David Thoreau argued in the early 1800s that refusal to pay tax is a form of civil disobedience to let the politicians know you are not happy. Mr. Thoreau spent much time in jail to protest an ongoing war for which he refused to pay taxes.
Glad someone's fighting (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm liking the sound of these iiNet people - they were the ones who wanted to say a big 'screw you' to the proposed government censorship scheme, too. Any Aussies care to comment on whether they're actually the good guys or not?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
They're one of the better ISP's yeah. I hate their adds though!
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not an Aussie, but I think it's unproductive (and often counter-productive) to try to label companies or people as "good" or "bad." This particular action appears to be good. Nuff said.
Parent
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't think 'good' and 'bad' are helpful adjectives to describe a company to a friend who might be interesting in purchasing services from said company and who will eventually need to deal with said company?
Two examples, Comcast and Netlix. I've read quite a bit actions that both companies have taken, and have been on the phone with both companies several times. If I were referring a friend for a high-speed internet service, I probably wouldn't recommend Comcast because I think that they are a 'bad' company. They do things like throttle your internet connection if you're using bit-torrent, regardless if it's for completely legal purposes or not. They are lobbying for a tiered internet. They are rarely pleasant or on time to service calls, and calling their customer service center is an exercise in futility.
Netflix, on the other hand, I would recommend as a 'good' company, because they are constantly doing things that bennefit their customers. For example, they have been working very hard to bring streaming movies to people. I just got that ability with the latest xbox update, and it's awesome (really good quality too). They are also very good on the phone. The CSRs will really try to help you, and if you have some sort of technical question, they put you on the phone with somebody who understands and can answer your question!
So, in short, I think that labeling companies as 'good' and 'bad' is helpful. If a company is falling into the 'bad' category, and they don't want to be there, then they need to get off their ass and figure out what put them there.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely. A quick read through consumeraffairs.org shows that some companies trend "good" and some trend "bad". Like Honda is good, and Hyundai is bad. (I had to get that car analogy in there.) ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
And there should be a court order for each case before any action is taken against an ISP customer.
If I was an ISP I would first ask for any kind of court ruling in each case before providing any information to the *AA:s.
If we allow bypassing of the legal system then we can end up with companies and organizations fabricating evidence just to silence people.
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad we are talking about Australia, who is not governed by the US Constitution.
Re: (Score:2)
The quotes hold, though. It is wicked and disgraceful to convince people not to provide for their own protection. In a world with predators, the unarmed are known as prey.
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:4, Insightful)
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a FREE country..."
I call bullshit.
As I recently heard Lessig point out, the US government is less popular with its constituents these days than it was preceding the American revolution. Your economy is circling the drain. You have massive and growing separation of the rich and poor. You've had almost a decade of politicians shitting on your rights and your founding principles.
The time for you to mobilise your well-regulated militia was long ago. And you know what happened? Nothing.
It's about time you stopped being so naïve. It's clear the governments of developed and developing nations have no greater fear of a population of gun nuts than of flower-wielding hippies. Neither community will sacrifice their bread and circuses so long as they can vote for a new guy in the next election. Fair and transparent democracy is the best and most natural defence of a free nation, not the possibility of slaughtering a stack of your fellow countrymen in the name of revolution. All that gets you is the sort of political stability we see in Niger and Darfur.
Parent
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:5, Insightful)
It's kind of like the Borg:
The individuals who joined the collective weren't really evil people. The Borg will assimilate anyone. But once they become part of the collective mindset, they have one goal, and that goal can really only be achieved in an evil way.
Corporations tend to work the same way. Most of the individuals are not evil, but they contribute toward a whole that is going in an evil direction. Some time it is tough to take a step back and go "if I do this, they could use it for something else..." I always wonder who was the jerk who wrote the "virus" that went on the Sony BMG music CD's that disabled the ability to burn CDs as a form of copy protection. Surely that person knew what he/she was doing was wrong. But in other cases it is more gray. The same tools can be used for good or evil. And if evil makes you more profit, well.. that is what happens.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe this is why I keep getting fired. I refuse to give-up my individualism for the corporate collective. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
It's kind of like the Borg:
So they're a rip off of a Dr Who villan. '
Re:Glad someone's fighting (Score:5, Informative)
Internode and iiNet are the two awesome ISPs in this country, although there are lots of smaller ones. You'll want to avoid the ISPs that charge $180/GB on any of their plans for excess usage such as Telstra, Dodo or Optus. This is not a typo. That's 180 Australian Dollars for every Gigabyte you go over your allowance. For example, Optus's 'Yes Fusion $79 plan comes with 4 GB and $150 for every Gigabyte over that. Needless to say, they've got their had stuck up so far their own bottom that they can see daylight through their own ears. But even they completely oppose the plan.
A certain Mark Newton who works for Internode is also an extremely outspoken critic of the censorship plan. But Telstra, iiNet and Internode, likely 3 out of the biggest 5 ISPs all have important people saying that the filtering won't work [zdnet.com.au].
Broadband Choice [whirlpool.net.au] is an excellent overview of the choices out there. Check out Whirlpool [whirlpool.net.au] if you want to know more about the situation.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I left Australia coming up on 2 years ago, so maybe things have changed, but Optus cable always seemed very good to me. Speeds were consistently reasonable (approx 10Mbit down, 1.5Mbit up), price was $69.95 a month, and it was capped to 12GB a month (with a "bonus" 24GB for offpeak, so if I wanted to download something big, I'd do it off peak, giving me effectively 36GB a month if managed properly). Only downloads were counted towards the limit - uploads were unlimited. If I went over the limit (the 12GB
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because they're fighting back. (Score:5, Informative)
> What I'm wondering is why iiNet is the *only* ISP getting sued.
Because they stood up to the studios. Rather than kicking people offline, they forwarded the complaints to the cops because they had no intention of pretending to be policemen.
The summary is inaccurate on that point: they did NOT ignore the complaints. In fact, there are police in the same building as them, so they forwarded all those complaints over to them. The fact that the police did nothing is another matter, but perfectly understandable given the kind of "evidence" they're usually supplied with, especially when there are more important crimes to prosecute.
Anyhow, the studios obviously want to make an example out of the only ISP who isn't willing to play along with their power grabs in order to convince the others to be more compliant.
Parent
Re:Because they're fighting back. (Score:4, Interesting)
Major suckage.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Is there anything we can do to play hardball with the record companies at this point? I'm tired of simply sitting down and not buying their music and supporting companies and organizations which oppose them with periodic donations.
I'd propose a CD burning party, but first of all, it's a little too "third reich" for me to be totally comfortable with, and second, half the people would show up with laptops and blank discs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, if by "like Canada" he means it is a sovereign nation, has a large land area, is resource-rich, and sells a lot of its stuff to the US, then he's only being deceptive and can't be caught in an outright falsehood. China's not very much like Canada in most ways, though. Even a superficial glance at the news coverage from each country could tell you that.
This is an ages old trick of the trade for con artists and fraudsters. A con tells his mark something that's worded very ambiguously. He makes sure what
Will EFF intervene ? (Score:2)
Remember the iiNet doesn't sound right but (Score:2)
It might be a good idea to practice saying it. This is a test case and Australia hasn't been too pro-customer from what I've seen lately. Does anyone have any links or data that could link this case to US government, RIAA, MPAA, or any of their legal teams?
Maybe group-sourcing will work to find something to help the fight.
The only reason I see to oppose this (Score:5, Insightful)
Is that if they have enough evidence to make you get shut off the net, they have enough evidence to sue you. Stop passing the buck and file a lawsuit, jackasses.
I say let it happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure but you need to fight it at some point, because they will eventually try to ban encryption for the average citizen.
"What do you need to hide, hmmm? You need a permit for an encryption license"
Wild leap of logic (Score:5, Insightful)
So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.
Re: (Score:2)
They claim iiNet authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent its users from downloading pirated movies and TV shows.
So I guess this means that the Jews (and the Catholic Church and the Masons) really were responsible for 9/11 - after all, they failed to prevent it.
No, it means the MAFIAA authorised copyright infringement by failing to prevent people from pirating movies and TV shows. Don't expose their failed logic; use it against them.
Re:Even Wilder leap of logic (Score:5, Insightful)
So General Motors and their dealerships are responsible for thousands of instances of vehicular manslaughter?
I'm sorry, I don't think I like "authorized by failing to prevent" as a legal precedence.
Parent
To iiNet Customers (Score:3, Interesting)
Do everything you can to be suspicious without violating any laws. Download dozens of distrobutions of Linux, send massive files to your friends anything to get yourself noticed. Then, when they cut off your access, complain and complain and keep complaining until they either give in or give up.
Seriously, these test cases exist for a reason, show the ISP how much business it will cost them, show the government how many false positives they will get. It can't hurt and (if they aren't a buch of corrupt fools) it could help.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good tactic, but it only works if you have an ISP that is limiting access (like Comcast). My ISP is Verizon and they apparently don't care what I download, even though I'm maxing out my line at 100 KB/s.
But if Verizon started limiting my access based on content, then yes I think bit-torrenting millions of copies of Linus sounds like a good method of protest. I could then sue Verizon on the grounds that they are blocking my LEGAL access to public domain and free-to-download software.
Re: (Score:2)
Correction:
"But if Verizon started limiting my access based on [my usage of bittorrent]....."
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
...millions of copies of Linus...
When did he upload [wikipedia.org]?!
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, but I'll be even more impressed when they invent little tiny robots to clean the cholesterol out of my arteries. That way I can eat artery-clogging pizza and not feel guilty about it!
Complain to who? (Score:2)
iiNet, and the industry body, the Internet Industry Association, say ISPs should not be required to take action against any customers until they have been found guilty of an offence by the courts.
Saturating your internet connection isn't going to affect a court case one way or the other.
If anything, iiNet customers should write to their ISP to thank them for going to bat for sane copyright enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
No. The most-likely problem is the ISP will try to block bittorrent usage. Even for legal downloads like Linux. As a form of protest, you then attempt to grab lots and lots of copies of Linux (via bittorrent) as a way to protest, and sue the company on the grounds that they are blocking legal access to free software and violating contract/neutrality.
Re: (Score:2)
No. The most-likely problem is the ISP
I doubt they'll try this as every WOW player in Australia would not longer be able to update their game.
WTF is wrong with Australia these days? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
what would you have them do? Australia is full of criminals, and these are reasonable actions to keep them corralled. A bunch of people walking around with bad attitudes, large knives, and strange accents talking about barbies and mates and dingos. I'm just glad they are a continent unto themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Think of the CHILDREN! Won't somebody pleeeeease think of the CHILDREN?!?"
Australia itself is not at fault, neither is the majority of the population who would be quite content to continue being a bastion of open-minded free thinking (much like most of Canada, which I'm proud to live in). No, if there's any blame to assign here, it should be directed squarely at the two groups at fault: Greedy, amoral media executives who would be all too happy to set up a global dictature where their content, flawed and awful as it might get, would be rewarded with mountains of ill-gotten cash
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The E.U. is hardly open. I mean, you can't even wear an attractive Swastika pin without getting arrested by the polizei. Where's the freedom in that? ;-)
But seriously there are a lot of ways that the E.U. is less free than America. Particularly in the area of self-defense against criminals (you cannot). The taxes are ridiculously high (60 cents/gallon versus $4/gallon) and overall just a more-restrictive society.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While both of our cultures have European roots, they've both been equally influenced by the US. Saying that NZ is more "European" just shows that you hold it (and Europe) in higher regard than the US and Australia. Your comparisons, from what i can see, aren't even remotely accurate..
Please note that I actually think New Zealand is a lovely place, i just think you're romanticising a bit.
ip law is a gentleman's agreement (Score:3, Insightful)
for a select few major players in the rarefied business of media distribution, circa 1988
now, any pimply faced teenager with a net connection has more distribution power than time warner and bertelsmann in 1988. but the law hasn't changed to reflect that technological change in last 20 years
now, those dying business powers wish to use the laws meant for their private little club to impose their will on a billion teenagers. a billion poor meda hungry teenagers with obfuscation, encryption, spoofing, etc., at their disposal
good luck with that
what if they disconnect the wrong person or (Score:3, Interesting)
Well this just seems like the AU gov is really f'd up these days. IMO.
Oz? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No
Re: (Score:2)
That's funny, whenever I think of Oz I think of a nightclub in New Orleans.
Re: (Score:2)
Can we please stop using the term "Oz" to refer to Australia, particularly in the context of film studios? There is an "Oz" series, which could lead to confusion, and someone searching for stories about Australia is unlikely to include "Oz" in their search.
Oh....that explains why no one thought to ask the wizard for help.
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible to lay-down 15 exemptions, and thereby keep the paycheck garnishment to a minimum. On Apirl 15 you will then be handed a bill of ~$10,000 by the IRS which you can choose not to pay.
The IRS will come after you of course, but Henry David Thoreau argued in the early 1800s that refusal to pay tax is a form of civil disobedience to let the politicians know you are not happy. Mr. Thoreau spent much time in jail to protest an ongoing war for which he refused to pay taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and I explained what procedure to follow to stop paying taxes... even the automatic income tax deductions.