"Is this related to the "3 copyright breaches, your internet service provider will ban you" law?" --carrot
Yes, however "copyright breaches" is based on accusations of copyright infringement as judged by the ISP, not by a court of law. The techniques used to identify infringement are not reliable:
http://dmca.cs.washington.edu/ Here's an example of a completely false accusation in NZ:
http://coffee.geek.nz/thedayiwasaccused ... fringement
While our opposition to s92 is about maintaining due process there is the wider issue of copyright law itself and what qualifies as copyright infringement. For example, I quoted what you wrote (I used your copyrighted text without permission) because quoting snippets of text is legal, and yet if I were to quote audio or quote video (perhaps to make a The Daily Show-like political commentary) this would be illegal. As an artist I've seen many works (mostly music and visual arts) that are based on sampling -- sometimes they're sampling text (that's legal without permission) and sometimes they're sampling audio (that's not legal without permission). The problem with bypassing the courts is that it bypasses any defence that someone has for using material -- and this affects artists. A black and white view of copyright is harming the grey area which artists use and cherish, I assure you (and that's what the Creative Freedom Foundation are all about).
"Can you find the law itself so that we can read it?" --Lacertae
here's the law
92c is very clear about taking down material before a court order but 92a is more subtle. The page at
http://creativefreedom.org.nz/s92.html has a fuller explanation of this and links to 3rd party analysis.
In short however, as ISPs transmit data across their own network (for their users) they're open to copyright infringement claims themselves unless they comply with s92a. ISPs are therefore put into the role of policing copyright infringement accusations without judicial oversight against their customers, all while risking their business if they get it wrong. It's in this impossible situation and this poorly thought out law that bypasses the courts that ISPs are saying they will be forced to disconnect customers. RIANZ (the local equivalent of the RIAA) say that having to provide evidence is both "impractical" and "ridiculous" (source:
http://tinyurl.com/impractical-and-ridiculous ). When you bypass the courts and due process in favour of free market of risk-averse ISPs the nature of s92a becomes clear. As you can see from
http://creativefreedom.org.nz/s92.html the implications of this poorly written law are now increasingly understood by mainstream press.
Thanks for helping spread the word everyone
