Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia Government Piracy The Courts

Australian Gov't To Streamline Anti-Piracy Lawsuit Process 121

Posted by timothy
from the streamlining-always-looks-cool dept.
daria42 writes "Remember how the mass piracy lawsuits common in the U.S. are now coming to Australia? Of course you do. Well, now Australia's Government has come out backing the legal process which makes them possible — and is even promising to streamline it. Anti-piracy organisations will be jumping for joy — but I'm not sure how popular the move will be with the rest of the population."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australian Gov't To Streamline Anti-Piracy Lawsuit Process

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Suddenly I have something to protest about in the occupy wall street movement's local activities...

  • I can buy a seedbox to bypass all of this nonsense. Even better, I can open up my WiFi for some plausible deniability. Eat your heart out AFACT.

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      Don't mean to be impolite...but, you could start...paying for things. You know, start small, like an MP3, and go from there.

      (God, take away the free shit and the Joos pitch a bitch don't they!?)
      • by Pseudonym Authority (1591027) <SammyKake@noSPAm.gmail.com> on Saturday October 15, 2011 @04:16AM (#37722484)
        No, unacceptable. That only encourages their behavior. Defiant to the end.
        • Defiant to the end

          So what part of disobeying the government rule and doing what this law forbids is NOT defiant? Eventually the government will learn to stop F$%# ing with its' people and stop this stupid crap.

        • by tqk (413719)

          No, unacceptable. That only encourages their behavior. One who lives upon others; a pertinacious and indolent dependent; a parasite; a sponger to the end.

          FTFY. The honourable action to take is to boycott them, but that would require you to have a sense of honour and some self-control.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by flimflammer (956759)

        It's not that I don't agree with what you've said, but the problem is that this behavior encompasses far more than just people committing copyright infringement.

        • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

          It's not that I don't agree with what you've said, but the problem is that this behavior encompasses far more than just people committing copyright infringement.

          Please explain, Sifu.

      • It's become ideological now. A lot of people got into piracy for the free stuff, but then it became a moral issue - they either object to the business practices often associated with the larger copyright industries, or believe that the benefits of copyright are outweighed by the draconian measures required to enforce it in the age of the personal computer.
      • by jonwil (467024) on Saturday October 15, 2011 @06:08AM (#37722748)

        Hey mr content producer, you start selling the content I want here in Australia (on DVD preferably) and I will stop pirating your content from YouTube and BitTorrent and start paying for it.

        I cant find ANY of the Yahoo Serious films on DVD in any local store for example. Nor can I find any seasons of The Real Ghostbusters past season 1. Nor can I find many of the cool documentaries (both film and TV) that I want to buy on DVD (such as those from the History Channel).

        • by bane2571 (1024309)
          and to top it off could you please stop charging the same price on imports as you did when our dollar was half the value?

          I'm sure the US side games will be surprised that it will cost me $90 - $120 (US dolalrs too) to buy a new release, non Collector's edition game.

          And don't even get me started on the retail prices of some DVDs.
      • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday October 15, 2011 @06:45AM (#37722860) Journal

        Don't mean to be impolite...but, you could start...paying for things

        Actually, you often can't. The content industry has pushed for region coding, meaning that you can't import US DVDs and watch them in Australia. Australia is Region 4 - most DVDs get a Region 1 release, then a Region 2 release a bit later, and maybe a Region 4 release if the content producers can be bothered.

        One of the changes that I would love to see made to copyright law is a refusal to distribute count made a valid affirmative defence for non-commercial copyright infringement. Copyright is a bargain between society and the creators giving them exclusive distribution rights (for a limited time) in exchange for publishing their work. If they refuse to publish it, then they should not be given the protection of copyright. This would give the content industry a very strong incentive to start making worldwide downloads available as soon as their work is ready, rather than releasing DVDs in the USA 6 months after a film shows, in Europe a year after, and in Australia eventually (maybe).

        • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 15, 2011 @07:17AM (#37722946)

          One of the changes that I would love to see made to copyright law is a refusal to distribute count made a valid affirmative defence for non-commercial copyright infringement.

          To make this fully effective, you need to make the legislation quite complex, or there will be loopholes. If it applies only when they fail to distribute it in your region, they'll just release it on Betamax. If they have to release it in a common format, they'll release it on DVD, but crippled somehow: unskippable 30-minute intro, Swahili-language-only, etc.

          Two simpler alternative changes to copyright law that accomplish the same goal:

            * Allow commercial format-shifting. So someone can start a business buying US DVDs, ripping and re-burning them as region-free, destroying the originals, and exporting them to Australia. For extra credit, allow modification, so the business can remove unskippable intro sequences, etc.

            * Compulsory licensing. Anyone can start a business selling DVDs of a movie, provided that they give 50% of their revenue to the copyright holder. Album covers already work much like this.

          Either of these allow new businesses to bring copyrighted works to untapped markets (which ensures that someone will do it), while still giving the content creators a cut.

          • The law wouldn't have to be very complex, it could just specify 'a bona fide effort to distribute in a common format playable on all devices reasonably expected to be able to play media of this form' and leave it up to the courts. Currently, the definition of fair use is pretty fuzzy and there's a lot of leeway for the courts to interpret it. That phrasing would also have the nice side effect that anything that was distributed in a format where DRM blocked format shifting would not count.
          • Allow commercial format-shifting. So someone can start a business buying US DVDs, ripping and re-burning them as region-free, destroying the originals, and exporting them to Australia

            You'd be amazed at how many people, even Slashdotters, are opposed to this sort of thing. When this story came up [slashdot.org], there was a a lot of support for the director to do exactly what he/she wants with the movie.

            And that is why so many people in the general public support copyright: they believe the creator ought to be able to control his creation.

            • by tqk (413719)

              ... they believe the creator ought to be able to control his creation.

              I agree with them. However, as long as I'm not ripping their creation and burning copies that would interfere with that creator's future sales, the creator's control of his/her creation ends once money's changed hands in a legal sale. That creator's got no moral or ethical right to tell us what we can do with what was purchased legally.

              If the law says otherwise, the law's an ass, and I will happily ignore it.

        • by tqk (413719)

          Don't mean to be impolite...but, you could start...paying for things

          Actually, you often can't. The content industry has pushed for region coding, meaning that you can't import US DVDs and watch them in Australia.

          Really? I get DVDs sent to me from friends in Europe all the time as gifts. I've no trouble playing them. On my Linux box, of course. They, of course, won't play in my DVD player box, but Linux/FLOSS doesn't give a rat's ass about Region Encoding garbage.

          Don't use a Broken By Design operating system on your computer, and you can too. We Linux fanbois have been screaming this at you for close to two decades!

          [Methinks you really ought to change your .sig now too.]

          • by smash (1351)
            technically, what you are doing is just as illegal as torrenting the movie.
            • by tqk (413719)

              Don't mean to be impolite...but, you could start...paying for things

              Actually, you often can't. The content industry has pushed for region coding, meaning that you can't import US DVDs and watch them in Australia.

              Really? I get DVDs sent to me from friends in Europe all the time as gifts. I've no trouble playing them. On my Linux box, of course. They, of course, won't play in my DVD player box, but Linux/FLOSS doesn't give a rat's ass about Region Encoding garbage.

              Don't use a Broken By Design operating system on your computer, and you can too. We Linux fanbois have been screaming this at you for close to two decades!

              technically, what you are doing is just as illegal as torrenting the movie.

              Then the law's an ass, and I can't help with that. The DVDs were legally purchased. I'm not pirating. The person who sent them to me didn't pirate them. I'm just finding a way to play stuff that was sent to me as gifts. If that's infringing or illegal, that's insane.

              The producers are stupidly asserting rights they've no moral or ethical right to assert. Why should anyone give a flying !@#$ about them and their insane rules if that's the way they think it ought to work? They're clearly attempting to r

        • I would bet if people stopped pirating and also stopped buying, the MPAA would try to pass legislation to force consumers to buy one movie a month. These companies just want easy money, and they're fighting hard for it.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by htnprm (176191)

      On your second point re: leaving your wifi open, you'll probably find your end legislation looks similar to what we've had put in in NZ, where you, as the 'account holder' are responsible for all activity under your account, so "My wifi was open. It was someone else", won't work.

      The seedbox though, yes.

  • It is not me. I'm just the fool paying tax for the last few decades.

    How do I get Aussies to riot. It seem we will put up with anything like whipped dogs.

    We are so whipped people will agrue with me.
  • Really who is this government? Not the one we voted for that's for sure. We voted for the Labor party not the Coalition, not the party that supports corporations, not the party that supported bigger governments, and best of all the party that said quite plainly there will never be a carbon tax.

    Why is it not possible to fire a government that has flat out lied on every question posed to them in their job interview?

    • It is. You walk into the polling place and vote for someone else.
      • It is. You walk into the polling place and vote for someone else.

        Excellent idea! But I think that's what people thought they were doing in 2007 when we ditched the coalition. I thought the two parties were pretty hard to distinguish in the last election; but I told myself I was just being cynical... now, it's plainly obvious that current politics involves this sick competition between the two parties to be as utterly, completely, and hopelessly exactly the same as each other.

        I've never voted for either of t

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You might want to read up on Australian political history and how the system works.

      The current Labor government having support of the Greens and the Independents to govern is perfectly legitimate. Add up the primary vote for Labor, the Greens, and the 3 Independents and you'll find it totals to over 50%. The Labor party generally supports bigger government than the Liberal Nationals. And finally, the alleged "carbon tax" that is coming in is actually an Emissions Trading Scheme. Which Labor has had a policy

    • I have always supported the idea of perjury for politicians. Make everything they say during campaign advertising and debate under oath. It won't mean that they actually do the things that they are claiming they will do now, it means they will tone down their claims. That is still a plus though, legally mandating a bit of honesty would go a long way.
      • by jamstar7 (694492) on Saturday October 15, 2011 @08:00AM (#37723034)
        I've always supported the 'two term' theory of politics: 1 term in office, 1 in jail.
      • by drsmithy (35869)

        Make everything they say during campaign advertising and debate under oath.

        Uh huh. And how are you going to account for the situations like the one we have now, where the lack of a majority can require a compromise implying someone has "lied" ?

        Apparently Australians have gotten so used to be ruled by a single party, they get confused and scared when it's not the case.

        • by thegarbz (1787294)

          The problem is that there is no compromise. There is only bargaining between a few key independents. We have mostly the greens to thank for things like the carbon tax. Thanks to our two party preferred system the independents had to side with one of the major parties. Julia Gillard basically bent over backwards to accommodate their wishes so that she could retain the top job of PM.

          Labor is not the party in power, the independents and greens are, and to accommodate them lots of questionable legislation is be

        • Apparently Australians have gotten so used to be ruled by a single party, they get confused and scared when it's not the case.

          No, they just forget that liberal party governments are actually a coalition government between the libs and nationals.

    • by Ihmhi (1206036)

      It is possible to fire a government, usually. You'd have recall elections, petitions, etc. if anyone would get off their asses.

      Alternatively, you could fire at your government, but considering it's Australia that would consist of slingshots and crossbows (if they haven't been banned yet).

      • by quenda (644621)

        It is possible to fire a government, usually. You'd have recall elections, petitions, etc.

        Governments can be fired by the head of state, or by the elected parliament. A "recall election" makes no sense as governments are not directly elected.
        Yes, slingshots and crossbows are somewhat banned. Gun ownership is still high outside the cities, but here we prefer to use them for sport than for killing people.

        • by Ihmhi (1206036)

          Is a government not the politicians and government employees?

          Citizens don't have much in the way of direct control over anything other than their congressional senators and representatives. If they don't do what we want them to do, if they can't solve the problems we need them to solve, then it's entirely possible to recall most or all of them. The Heart of the American government is still ultimately Congress (which makes the laws). Replace enough of Congress and you can get something done.

          Honestly, if we e

          • by quenda (644621)

            Is a government not the politicians and government employees?

            No, the government does not include opposition politicians or public servants who remain in place with a change of government.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government [wikipedia.org]

            Replace enough of Congress and you can get something done.

            But you replaced the whole federal executive in your last election, and almost nothing changed.
            Judging by the complete lack of prosecutions on Wall St, the same people still hold the real power.

    • by Dan541 (1032000)

      Labor - the ones who are building the great firewall.

      • by thegarbz (1787294)

        That's very last year thinking. With key independents and the greens against the idea, and an opposition who wouldn't be caught dead voting for an idea raised by the governing party there's no chance in hell they're going to build their great firewall.

        Right now its at the point of voluntary filtering by two ISPs who quite frankly offer the least competitive products on the market anyway.

        • by Dan541 (1032000)

          Mandatory internet censorship is a Labour policy. The politics of other parties are irrelevant, labour have never backed down from it.

  • Is it great news because I support the entertainment industry? No, of course not. It great news because things need to continue to get much worse before people will finally get off there collective asses to do something about it.
    You can already see more and more common folks starting to make noise. What we need is that extra push to get the common man to say, "OK, enough is enough" and actually stand up.
    The western governments are out of control in general and they need to be taken back. News like this just

    • More and more? I've seen that opposite trend in the last 10 years. Industries long ago learned that you can do pretty much anything you want, as long as you introduce it one piece at a time. It's absolutely astounding how much crap the general population will put up with as long as it's spoon fed to them one bite at a time.
      • by Ltap (1572175)
        Exactly. The boiling frog effect is especially noticeable with DRM in games -- what was once CD checks is now full-blown rootkits which try to wrestle control of your OS away from you. The trouble is that, not only has the DRM become more restrictive, but it's also become more subtle -- the general person will actually be happier, because then they don't have to input a serial number or something similar. Most have no idea what some DRM does and, even if they do, they actually believe the company has a righ
    • by Kjella (173770)

      It great news because things need to continue to get much worse before people will finally get off there collective asses to do something about it. You can already see more and more common folks starting to make noise.

      Judging from every third world country that's suffering from really massive and direct corruption, I don't think so. It's a catch 22 where people support the system because it works and the system works because people support it. If the people at the top are just lining their own pockets then that'll spread downwards and once the system becomes so dirty that corruption is the norm rather than the exception then it's extremely hard to scourge. Everybody is looking to screw the system because the system is ob

    • by jamstar7 (694492)

      You can already see more and more common folks starting to make noise. What we need is that extra push to get the common man to say, "OK, enough is enough" and actually stand up.
      The western governments are out of control in general and they need to be taken back. News like this just brings the day closer....I hope.

      Not gonna happen that way. The only way I can see to clean things up ain't gonna happen either: do away with all campaign contributions and replace them with Federal/state funds you qualify for by applying for the office you're running for. Show a petition for, say, 20,000 verifiable signatures for president of the US and you qualify for Federal campaign funding to run for president. Pay for it the way we do now, only, instead of a check mark on your W-4, the government earmarks 2 bucks taken from what y

  • couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. but they manage to stab each other in the back quite efficiently.
  • Retards (Score:5, Insightful)

    by labnet (457441) on Saturday October 15, 2011 @04:39AM (#37722538)

    We the people don't want to 'steal', otherwise KMART would have uzis at the door instead of some bored chick.
    Give the people an easy way to download everything at a reasonable price ($5 new release , $1 for back catalouge), and most of piracy will go away overnight.
    Making war against the consumer of your product is not a long term business strategy.
    Unfortunatley, most of the MPAxx's of the world seem to be run by retards.

    • We the people don't want to 'steal', otherwise KMART would have uzis at the door instead of some bored chick.
      Give the people an easy way to download everything at a reasonable price ($5 new release , $1 for back catalouge), and most of piracy will go away overnight.
      Making war against the consumer of your product is not a long term business strategy.
      Unfortunatley, most of the MPAxx's of the world seem to be run by retards.

      The physical shop is a poor analogue for piracy. Most people know that stealing an object is wrong, and through good character or fear of consequences they don't steal. Downloading is different. I wouldn't dream of stealing from a shop, even if I knew I could get away clean; I do however occasionally grab a torrent.

      Making stuff conveniently available and cheap (seriously, 10 euro for a 10 year old album?) will help but will not eliminate most piracy. The major downloaders I know have decent jobs, and could

      • by Dhalka226 (559740)

        You're right, of course. There are some people who could easily buy things but still choose to pirate them, and there always will be. The proper response to those people is to ignore them. We just established that they will not be turned into customers, so the only other choice is to turn them into criminals -- which may feel good, but not only reflects badly but probably costs far more than it ever returns.

        Rather, the people a company needs to reach are the ones who want to buy the product but can't,

  • What else is the NBN for other than using copious bandwidth for digital content? I sure as hell ain't gonna get a Telstra T-Box and be forced into watching movies and TV shows on their pathetic schedules, and most likely be forced to watch advertising without being able to skip through it. Or, what's worse, being forced to select from the paltry range of good TV shows from overseas and have to watch locally-produced content which is mostly rubbish. No thank you.

    This government has got to go. Make no mistake

    • I suspect part of the NBNs political purpose is to make it easier to justify government-imposed filtering. It's much easier to argue that something needs to be tightly regulated if tax money is being spent on it.
  • ....and just how many Pirates to the expect to net over in Oz with this legislation? Will it really be any easier to prosecute them? Piracy is pretty well defined here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy [wikipedia.org] Of particular interest is: Modern definitions of piracy include the following acts: Extortion That means extortion of any kind, including "legalised" extortion which this piece of cartel brought legislation attempts to enable, are acts of piracy. When will we have legislation to protect us from the
  • They used to be cool, but now it's like they'v been annexed by the fucking Nazis again.

  • I doubt the people of australia want this type of laws. Probably hare bought by corportations. If that is true, the political system on australia need a huge change. The 1% has corrupted the system there too.

  • The Model is broken (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Stonefish (210962) on Saturday October 15, 2011 @07:26AM (#37722964)

    The copyright model is broken and has been massaged by large corporations into a licence to print money. Copyright should only apply to individuals and for limited periods of time. Nothing created while my father has lived has ever gone into the public domain which was one of the key reasons why copyright was granted. How does 25 years for individuals and 5 years for companies sound? That way the price that they pay for copyright protection is and end date to protection, if the corporations don't like it they can use proprietary mechanisms and once they're broken they can't claim copyright. It would also force companies to licence copyright management from individuals rather than buying them outright.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      The model is indeed broken.

      One discussion is about what a reasonable copyright term is. I think it should be obvious to anyone that the digital/Internet age brought the printing press and the record factory and the photo labs from big brick buildings in the industrial area right on everyone's desktop. This makes copyrights suddenly relevant to everyone, not just to a few shady characters operating an unlicensed vinyl pressing/cassette tape duplication/CD pressing plant. This also made the public domain rele

  • Anti-piracy organisations will be jumping for joy â" but I'm not sure how popular the move will be with the rest of the population

    What does it matter what the "rest of the population" wants? It's the anti-piracy organizations that are the "job creators" and they're the ones that are putting dollars in the pockets of our politicians instead of paying taxes and they're the ones who are THE BOSS OF YOU so shut the fuck up you whiny-ass titty baby. Get with the program AND GET ON YOUR KNEES, AUSTRALIA.

    -T

  • Since when do their needs or opinions matter? Your opinion only counts if you can pay.

  • What I don't understand is why these copyright failures don't use what is already in place. All they need to do is file an Order 15A for discovery with the court and the ISP will happily hand over the information required. Since this whole fiasco with iiNET had started, there had been exactly zero Order15A's applied for by AFACT. iiNET even told them exactly how to do it but were then painted as pirate-harborers and sympathisers. This entire argument by the industry is malicious at best. We have a judi
  • by viking80 (697716)

    The internet is basically a copy machine. I realized this writing an IP stack. It might as well be called the interCopy or the big copy. This word may also make it clear for the distributor that if you put your stuff in the interCopy, it will be copied. That is what the interCopy does. If you do not want your stuff copied, just don't put it in the interCopy.

You can tell how far we have to go, when FORTRAN is the language of supercomputers. -- Steven Feiner

Working...