The Voltage Pictures VP of Royalties was interviewed on the radio as I drove home today. He said that Voltage is doing this because a small producer they cannot cannot cross-subsidise from other parts of the business to cover the losses due to infringing copies of their movies (His argument was clearly based on the assumption that every infringing copy is a lost sale). The big players can afford to do this and see the negative press as more costly than the potential increase in revenue. He refused to be drawn on what they would be demanding from the alleged infringers. There were also some poor choices of words, assumption of guilt, and sense that they are the law.
Read (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/stories/s4212674.htm) or listen (http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/daily/hack_wed_2015_4_8.mp3) to the show.
I am sure that the plaintiff in this case would dearly love to engage in "speculative invoicing" and to do that they need somewhere to send a legal threat with a nice "make it go away for only $2000" clause. The judge has at least considered this, so the plaintiff must pass any correspondence destined for the parties revealed here through the court. That should at least control the extraction of money by threat of legal action with no intent to proceed to actual litigation. My guess is that the plaintiff will try to ID one or two endpoints that look like a business/individual with reasonable sized pockets and try to set a precedent with them.
This decision, and the recent data retention law that ensures these records exist for fishing expeditions, have essentially ensured that VPN providers will do well out of Aussies.
The law tightens the definition of "Journalist" over that in the existing Evidence Act so that this is impractical.
Journalist means a person who is engaged and active in the publication of news and who may be given information by an informant in the expectation that the information may be published in a news medium.
(i) a person who is working in a professional capacity as a journalist; or (ii) an employer of such a person;
If you are not being paid to be a journalist or paying someone to be a journalist then you are not a journalist, and warrants are not required, under this law. A subtle and deliberate difference.
Making the ISP keep it too:
- Makes it reliably available for litigation by big media over copyright infringement and removes the ability of ISP to defend customer privacy with inconvenient legal actions or by simply not holding the information. Hosting privacy protecting proxy/VPN services has essentially be outlawed on Australian soil... or will be as the holes in this legislation become evident and the scope creep continues.
- Makes it reliably available for abuse by political parties: want to know who leaked the embarrassing x? Simple warrantless search with no oversight.
They told the US where they could put their nuclear powered and/or armed vessels in 1984 and have stuck to it. That's is NZ's one bout of teenage rebellion. Now they have "grown up."
I also listen via my ISP's mirror of the Double J stream. Unfortunately that stream does not carry useful metadata (song titles etc.) that VLC can pick up so when I occasionally want those I need the web site. I will not lose sleep over the loss of the site though.
A radio station I listen to recently rebranded. Their "improved" web site does not deliver content without the WebTrends tracking code being allowed through NoScript/Ghostery. I seems to do do some magic callback foo to achieve this. This behaviour seems to rapidly expanding on the site; I found a page today that required NetCensus tracking as well. Curiously I get more content if I block JS altogether (although not fully functional). http://doublej.net.au/
The UK/ca/AU/nz Prime Ministers are effectively elected dictators
Bwah ha ha ha ha! You clearly have not been paying attention to Australian politics since 2007. The "dictator" was toppled several times by revolt from within and ended up running a minority Government until the election in Sep 2013. A "dictator" dependent on the support of minor parties to govern is hardly the description of one with unrestricted control. The current "dictator" is having trouble quelling the open discontent from within his own coalition in several policy areas and cannot get important policy initiatives through the parliament. Unfettered power? I don't think so.