Apologies... in a hurry. Sent it off to the poster not the list. I owe you all a beer. I said: Judge David's a good sort (happy to get bad press to publicise a bad decision etc...). http://tcf.org.nz/content/f1bbc405-74de-40c3-9b16-2c660e5d23a2.cmr As for the question on false accusation - it's a huge issue. Either the ISP has to prove that the complainant is right or that they're wrong - either way you have to investigate and that costs $$ and potentially is a breach of privacy law (IANAL of course but I think this is the next big test for s92). Or you can decide not to investigate any of it and simply respond immediately upon receipt of a legal threat, which opens you up to the possibility that you're cutting someone off from the internet who may well be able to prove their innocence and will then turn around and sue. There is no safe harbour clause for ISPs. And let's not forget, ISP doesn't mean internet service provider in this case. It means anyone who offers internet access or who hosts content. Got a website? You're an ISP. Got a wifi connection at work? You're an ISP. Paul Brislen External Communications Manager Vodafone New Zealand 021 721 337 -----Original Message----- From: Hamish MacEwan [mailto:hamish.macewan(a)gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, 12 March 2009 11:27 a.m. To: nznog; Policy Advisory Group Cc: Brislen, Paul, VF-NZ; Andy Linton Subject: Re: [nznog] Fwd: [kiwi foo campers] stubbornness On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:06, Brislen, Paul, VF-NZ <Paul.Brislen(a)vodafone.com> wrote:
That doesn't necessarily mean s92 will vanish - the govt has suggested that if a Code doesn't get introduced (requiring buy-in from both sides ie ISPs and rights holders) then it will have to come up with its own solution. That may be non-ideal.
It may be, S92A certainly is non-ideal.
As an ISP we're happier working towards a solution (even if it is lipstick on a pig) that might make the existing law work while at the same time pointing out the flaws in the legislation as it stands (and I highly recommend Judge David Harvey's paper on s92 and why it should be chucked out for anyone who's interested in such things).
I think the lipstick is being applied to the non-standard end of the pig. URL for Judge Harvey's paper?
Plus if the govt does decide to come up with a new piece of legislation we've played ball and our input will be valued. I hope.
Your optimism is cheering, the Governments (is that how you express Labour and National coalitions?) have had significant expert, public and industry (non-Copyright industry) input and ignored it in favour of .... Given the breadth of definition for "ISP" in the Act "the negative possibility" impacts a wider constituency.
Paul
Hamish. -- http://tr.im/HKM ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unless otherwise stated, any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent those of Vodafone New Zealand Limited.