On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 21:52, Wesley Parish wrote: > From my point of view, that DMCA-like extension to copyright has the effect of > outlawing the use of the brain: > "so that the prohibition against the making, importing, hiring and > selling of devices, services or information designed to circumvent > "copy protection" be expanded to cover devices, services or > information that circumvent technological protection measures that > protect all rights provided to copyright owners, including > communication, not just copying;" > > Bang goes the New Zealand Knowledge Economy if you can't get intimate and > physical with your nearest and dearest to make a device a.k.a. a child's > brain, with the ability and capacity of circumventing "copy protection"! And > then it suggests outlawing the hiring of such a device as an individual human > equipped with a brain with the ability and capacity of circumventing "copy > protection". > > To put it bluntly, it doesn't make any sense.
actually what you are saying doesn't make sense Wesley. > And nonsensical laws have a way > of being ignored to death. > > Anyone know a politician who they can say this to, without getting the "Mrs > Grundy" treatment? > > Wesley Parish > > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:26, Timothy Musson wrote: > > Here's section 14 of NZ's Bill of Rights Act: > > > > "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the > > freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any > > kind in any form." > > > > And now for something completely different: > > > > "Digital Technology and the Copyright Act 1994: Policy Recommendations": > > http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/digital/cabinet/index.html > > > > <quote> > > The Ministry of Justice advises that this raises issues of consistency > > with section 14 of the Bill of Rights Act (the right to freedom of > > expression). Proposals intended to ensure that copyright applies equally > > to works in analogue and digital form are, however, likely to be > > considered reasonable and justifiable in Bill of Rights terms. > > </quote> > > > > Take a look at the Recommendations section, especially: > > > > <quote> > > It is recommended that the Committee: > > ... > > - agree to amend the provision relating to technological protection > > measures: > > 1. so that the prohibition against the making, importing, hiring and > > selling of devices, services or information designed to circumvent > > "copy protection" be expanded to cover devices, services or > > information that circumvent technological protection measures that > > protect all rights provided to copyright owners, including > > communication, not just copying; and > > 2. to facilitate the actual exercise of permitted acts where > > technological measures have been applied > > - agree to create an offence (of a fine not exceeding $150 000 and/or > > a term of imprisonment of up to five years) for large scale > > commercial dealing with devices, services or information designed to > > circumvent technological protection measures; > > ... > > </quote> > > > > > > "Amendments Proposed for Copyright Act" > > > > http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/digital/media/minister-20030625.html > > > > <quote> > > The proposed amendments: > > ... > > - Prohibit the supply or manufacture of devices, means or information > > that circumvent technological protection measures, where circumvention > > could enable infringement of any of the copyright owner’s exclusive > > rights, and provide criminal penalties for large scale commercial > > dealing in circumvention devices, means or information; > > - Introduce protections for electronic rights management information > > ("ERMI") that identifies content protected by copyright and the terms > > and conditions of use, and provide criminal penalties for large scale > > commercial dealing in copyright material where the dealer knows that > > ERMI has been removed or altered; > > ... > > </quote> > > > > Here's the main page (the list of received submissions is interesting): > > http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/digital/index.html > > > > > > I didn't know about this until very recently. I knew the government was > > considering adding "fair use" provisions to copyright law, but I didn't > > realise NZ was about to enact a DMCA equivalent. > > > > Y'know... > > For "fair use" to exist (and it must -- and the government seems to > > agree), it follows that tools that can circumvent copy protection must > > be legally and easily available to anyone. But if they are, then copy > > protection systems are completely and utterly useless and pointless. > > > > I also recall a RadioNZ interview earlier this year, in which the > > Recording Industry Association of NZ argued that we didn't need "fair > > use" rights because the RIANZ wasn't interested in suing people for > > taping a purchased CD to listen to on the car cassette deck. Judith > > Tizard (Associate Minister of Commerce) replied to the effect that it's > > just plain silly that something that everyone does (making "fair use" of > > copyrighted material) shouldn't be legal. > > > > What to CLUGers think? Does anyone have pointers to mailing lists / > > groups in NZ keeping an eye on changes to copyright law?
