[AusNOG] "ISPs agree to graduated warnings for pirates"

Mon Feb 23 20:13:43 EST 2015

Rod,

I completely agree with you... but I am also pragmatic.

The Copyright Holders are not going to back down... we're too far from an
Election, and in reality, this issue is not that publicly consumable until
they start to be effected - which is a way off.  When they do start being
effected, then perhaps we can have a little public outrage and maybe change
things - especially if it becomes an issue for the next election.

But right now, the liberals are are in the pockets of these Rights Holders,
and even a win in the High Court by iiNet isn't going to stop them.  While
this is the situation, and the government is threatening to make a decision
if the ISPs and Right Holders don't come to an agreement - that decision
may not be something either of us like.  And yes, it will likely be stupid,
unenforceable and not make sense - but it will cause us pain until it
becomes an election issue.

That said... what is Labor's position on this matter?  They support the
MetaData legislation to a certain degree... but what about this?  If they
support it - which they might if the Rights Holders are in their pockets
too (I would be if I was them), then we're screwed until users in the
street start being effected and the whole thing collapses around them.

In the end, I think this is going to be a lot of fuss over very little.
With SVOD becoming commonplace, I think TV and movies will reach parity and
with price pressure, the costs will be so low, it might just be easier to
pay for it - certainly a lot of people will.

Also, those who really want to download, will use VPN's and other new
methods available and they won't be detected anyway... again, it becomes
pointless.

No matter what happens, I think the scheme will be a failure - especially
financially.

...Skeeve

--

Skeeve Stevens - The ISP Guy

Email: skeeve at theispguy.com ; Twitter: @TheISPGuy
<https://twitter.com/TheISPGuy>
Blog: TheISPGuy.com <http://theispguy.com/> ; Facebook: TheISPGuy
<https://www.facebook.com/theispguy>

Linkedin: /in/skeeve <http://www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360:
Profile <https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9>

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Rod Veith <rod at rb.net.au> wrote:

> No Skeeve, you don’t ask for clarification. You should be telling them
> what threshold to use or do like I did and said I don’t support the scheme.
>
>
>
> Remember there are larger issues here and be very mindful of ‘scope creep’
> IF this scheme is adopted. Once a scheme like this is place and the Rights
> Holders are still not happy they will apply pressure for a small change to
> be made, say something small like requesting suspension of customer
> accounts until customer acknowledgement of wrongdoing or pays for
> challenge. Do you really want the industry forced into this position? Give
> these clowns power and they will use it to the maximum, exceed it where
> possible and then demand more.
>
>
>
> Rod
>
>
>
> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Skeeve
> Stevens
> *Sent:* Monday, 23 February 2015 6:16 PM
> *To:* Paul Brooks
> *Cc:* <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] "ISPs agree to graduated warnings for pirates"
>
>
>
> So everyone... let's get our act together, ask for clarification on what
> ISPs these apply to, or in general, hit back at the bits we don't like.
>
>
>
> In NZ for instance, they charge (still do?) the Copyright Holders to make
> a claim so that the ISPs are recompensed for the processing of claims.
>
>
>
> ...Skeeve
>
>
> --
>
> Skeeve Stevens - The ISP Guy
>
> Email: skeeve at theispguy.com ; Twitter: @TheISPGuy
> <https://twitter.com/TheISPGuy>
>
> Blog: TheISPGuy.com <http://theispguy.com/> ; Facebook: TheISPGuy
> <https://www.facebook.com/theispguy>
>
> Linkedin: /in/skeeve <http://www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve> ; Expert360:
> Profile <https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Paul Brooks <
> pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au> wrote:
>
> +1 Mark.
>
> Having been on the inside of the code development process enough times
> (but not this one) - the *biggest* spanner to the whole process would be
> for the Comms Alliance committee to receive a hundred submissions pointing
> out flaws, inconsistencies, suggestions for changes, suggestions for
> additions, changes to thresholds, all with reasons why the changes should
> be made, why the proposed measure is disproportionate, and the implications
> if they are not changed or included.
> Each one has to be raised, debated and considered for altered drafting.
> Each one provides an evidence trail that the draft Code does *not*
> represent the consensus of the industry, for the inevitable review later.
> Even better if the same points are raised by multiple comment submissions.
> And come April 8, the committee can genuinely tell the Government 'we
> couldn't meet the deadline because we're still working through the deluge
> of submissions from the public comment period'.
> *If* they get the deluge of comments and submissions - from the AusNOG
> (and non-AusNOG) community.
>
>
>
> On 23/02/2015 12:22 PM, Mark Newton wrote:
>
>
>
> On Feb 23, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Paul Brooks <pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The group that put this together had a deadline to put out a draft code
> that both sides could at least live with - if they don't meet the deadline
> with a draft that the service providers AND the content industry can live
> with, then the Government was going to 'create' one themselves and impose
> it whether you liked it or not - and most people figured that would be
> worse. They still might.
>
>
>
> Nope, that’d be much better.
>
>
>
> Make the government take some gooddamn responsibility for the inevitable
> public backlash. Make it their mess, beginning to end, enacted in a
> democratic forum where voters can make submissions and have a say, and the
> whole process can get watered down in the Senate. Make it so that when ISPs
> screw-over customers, customers are in no doubt whatsoever that they’re
> being screwed over due to government policy, and they can scream blue
> murder at their MPs and get the law changed.
>
>
>
> By agreeing to turn it into an industry issue, Comms Alliance has given
> the government plausible deniability, and usurped the democratic process by
> turning it into a cosy negotiated arrangement behind closed doors, where
> the content owners get what they want, and the service providers get them
> to agree to be nice, and we the public get literally no say in it
> whatsoever.  And when service providers screw over customers, customers
> will quite rightly direct their ire at their ISPs.
>
>
>
> Best possible outcome for the Government and the rightsholders: Free kicks
> for everybody! ISP industry rolls over *again*, and will subsequently
> wonder why they never have any political influence over anything, and keep
> getting treated with contemptuous disregard by both sides of politics
> because they are literally the easiest industry in the entire economy to
> house-train.
>
>
>
>   - mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150222/25e424cd/attachment.html>