Re: DMCA now law in NZ
_I_ know what copyright covers - but reading some of the weird cases in the States about the RIAA for example, and knowing that the RIAA (and the MPAA) is the source of much of what passes for copyright law these days - much as the big computer companies in the States are the source of what passes for patent law these days, I would not put it past people to attempt to game the system in that way. The system is built to be gamed. Wesley Parish On Thursday 10 April 2008 10:26, Nick Rout wrote: On Wed, April 9, 2008 9:14 pm, Wesley Parish wrote: And what happens if I write a story where that happens, and decide that the government has infringed my copyright by enacting a fictitious happening in real life? Without receiving a license from the author to do that a la a movie adaption agreement? You can't reason with some people, can you? Some people have some weird odeas on what copyright covers! -- Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish - Gaul is quartered into three halves. Things which are impossible are equal to each other. Guerrilla warfare means up to their monkey tricks. Extracts from Schoolboy Howlers - the collective wisdom of the foolish. - Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui? You ask, what is the most important thing? Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata. I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
And what happens if I write a story where that happens, and decide that the government has infringed my copyright by enacting a fictitious happening in real life? Without receiving a license from the author to do that a la a movie adaption agreement? You can't reason with some people, can you? Wesley Parish On Wednesday 09 April 2008 11:26, Douglas Royds wrote: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5objectid=10502960 The Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill ... introduces an offence, carrying a sentence of a maximum fine of $150,000 or up to five years imprisonment, or both, for commercial dealings in devices, services or information designed to circumvent technological protection measures Five years! Get some perspective, people. The word commercial has interesting implications for open source, though. http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/griffins-tech-blog/2008/4/9/format45shifti ng-legal-audio-anyway/?c_id=5 As internetNZ points out: We believe that if a consumer has legally purchased a licence to the rights to a copyrighted work, they should be able to store it any format they like, so long as it remains for their personal use ... the Act enshrines a notice and takedown system to deal with alleged copyright violations. This means a copyright holder can contact an ISP and request they remove from their servers, content they believe is breaching their copyright. They believe. If someone doesn't like what you've put up, or if there is any dispute, your ISP must take it down. It's just gone. === This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or lost by reason of this transmission. If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no other act on the email. Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been altered or corrupted during transmission. === -- Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish - Gaul is quartered into three halves. Things which are impossible are equal to each other. Guerrilla warfare means up to their monkey tricks. Extracts from Schoolboy Howlers - the collective wisdom of the foolish. - Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui? You ask, what is the most important thing? Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata. I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
linux-users@it.canterbury.ac.nz writes: As internetNZ points out: We believe that if a consumer has legally purchased a licence to the rights to a copyrighted work, they should be able to store it any format they like ... does this mean whole-disk backups and lab deployment images are illegal? Leif
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
On Wed, April 9, 2008 9:14 pm, Wesley Parish wrote: And what happens if I write a story where that happens, and decide that the government has infringed my copyright by enacting a fictitious happening in real life? Without receiving a license from the author to do that a la a movie adaption agreement? You can't reason with some people, can you? Some people have some weird odeas on what copyright covers! -- Nick Rout
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
The Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act has many good points. For example, ISPs do not breach copyright by holding a copy of a work, either in a cache or elsewhere on the system, such as on a Web page that they run for a user (the ISP was in breach before). The Act also allows time-shifting, format shifting, and decompiling. While “Technological Protection Measures” are allowed, it is not as bad as it could have been. For example, the CSS “encryption” on DVDs is not a TPM, because it “only controls access to a work for non-infringing purposes” (Section 226(b)).
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
Thanks for that clarification. It is great that ISPs and web-server providers have been spared liability for caching or serving copyright material. It is bad that, unlike Canada, this law enacts notice and take-down (rather than notice and notice, ie. we complain, you decide whether to take any notice). I don't get to argue the case, it's just gone. My understanding was that a previous amendment had made format shifting legal for audio. Perhaps I was mistaken. Does this Act extend format shifting to video? I'm curious about the only controls access to a work for non-infringing purposes bit. Does this mean that it doesn't qualify as a TPM if I have to crack it to achieve fair use, like, for instance, viewing, backing up, format-shifting, or putting something I've bought on my media server? If that is the case, is it OK for me to publish the crack so that other people can also make fair use of their purchased music or video? raveI recently bought a DVD, Vertical Ray of the Sun. Great film. Really, really good film, but the disc sports the latest toys from Macrovision, which seem to defeat libdvdcss. Fantastic. I own it. I just can't watch it, except on my elderly television, through my useless speakers, when there's a laptop with a really good LCD sitting there./rave PS: Are you able to fix your Reply To: address? I nearly sent this to you rather than the list. Michael JasonSmith wrote: The Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act has many good points. For example, ISPs do not breach copyright by holding a copy of a work, either in a cache or elsewhere on the system, such as on a Web page that they run for a user (the ISP was in breach before). The Act also allows time-shifting, format shifting, and decompiling. While “Technological Protection Measures” are allowed, it is not as bad as it could have been. For example, the CSS “encryption” on DVDs is not a TPM, because it “only controls access to a work for non-infringing purposes” (Section 226(b)). === This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or lost by reason of this transmission. If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no other act on the email. Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been altered or corrupted during transmission. ===
Re: DMCA now law in NZ
This is the consequence of signing up to Free Trade with the Ultimately Satanic state. On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Douglas Royds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5objectid=10502960 The Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill ... introduces an offence, carrying a sentence of a maximum fine of $150,000 or up to five years imprisonment, or both, for commercial dealings in devices, services or information designed to circumvent technological protection measures Five years! Get some perspective, people. The word commercial has interesting implications for open source, though. http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/griffins-tech-blog/2008/4/9/format45shifting-legal-audio-anyway/?c_id=5 As internetNZ points out: We believe that if a consumer has legally purchased a licence to the rights to a copyrighted work, they should be able to store it any format they like, so long as it remains for their personal use ... the Act enshrines a notice and takedown system to deal with alleged copyright violations. This means a copyright holder can contact an ISP and request they remove from their servers, content they believe is breaching their copyright. They believe. If someone doesn't like what you've put up, or if there is any dispute, your ISP must take it down. It's just gone. === This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or lost by reason of this transmission. If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no other act on the email. Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been altered or corrupted during transmission. === -- Sincerely etc. Christopher Sawtell
