Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Prepare to get screwed by digital rights management

Reply
Thread Tools

Prepare to get screwed by digital rights management

 
 
Geronimo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004



Will this happen here..?


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19246



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thing
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
Geronimo wrote:
>
>
> Will this happen here..?
>
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19246
>
>
>


"...Here it is again: "Why would a consumer want to buy something that
has more restrictions and less functionality for more money than current
solutions?....."

DSE told me a while back when I went to buy a DVD player (in anser to my
Q) no one sells a zoned DVD player in NZ, no one wnats to buy one.

DVD players are now generic and cheap "non-discrim terms for IP" means
the cheap players from Tiawan and China will be replaced with expensive
licenced models if anyone will buy.

Dual plane DVD burners are hitting the $150 mark.....down from $600+ 3
months back and there is room to go on this....sub $100? Why do we need
these new toys at all?

One exec was quoted as saying the TIVO(?) gets around forcing you to
watch the adverts, that means your stealing the content, your a criminal
in their eyes and dont forget it.

The hopefully saving grace I can see is these execs still only think in
terms of the domestic US and 1st world markets, Asia, China etc will
make and sell non-locked kit and being the biggest market this will win.
They also have a substantial own market in terms of their own content,
not evryone buys US drivel.

I hope so anyway...

And as for "fair use", I believe it is a US term, not a NZ one (in terms
of legalese) we enjoy fewer rights than a US consumer.

Our big dangers are

1) Helen Clark selling our souls to get a US trade agreement, we get to
sell a piddling amount of lamb to the US, while domestically we continue
to be raped by the US. At what point does our Government see our future
is wthin Asia as that's where we are?

2) OZ selling its soul first, then it becomes very hard for us not to
follow suit, if not impossible.


For me, I do not buy CD's anymore, because I object to paying 30+ for a
few tracks on a CD the rest I do not want. And I still have my vinyl
collection so why pay twice?

I watch virtually no TV because the adverts have ruined films, the
remainder of the TV content is 99% garbage only fit for the morons
amongst us. I do not listen to the radio anymore because of the
frequency and length of the adverts.

So how do execs get to sell to me? why try and screw the Internet, but
so far its proving bigger than them, I just want Asia on line soon so
its stays to big for them.

</rant>

regards

Thing











































 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Clarity
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
"thing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ujWed.22898$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Geronimo wrote:
> >
> >
> > Will this happen here..?
> >
> >
> > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=19246
> >
> >
> >

>
> "...Here it is again: "Why would a consumer want to buy something that
> has more restrictions and less functionality for more money than current
> solutions?....."
>
> DSE told me a while back when I went to buy a DVD player (in anser to my
> Q) no one sells a zoned DVD player in NZ, no one wnats to buy one.
>
> DVD players are now generic and cheap "non-discrim terms for IP" means
> the cheap players from Tiawan and China will be replaced with expensive
> licenced models if anyone will buy.
>
> Dual plane DVD burners are hitting the $150 mark.....down from $600+ 3
> months back and there is room to go on this....sub $100? Why do we need
> these new toys at all?
>
> One exec was quoted as saying the TIVO(?) gets around forcing you to
> watch the adverts, that means your stealing the content, your a criminal
> in their eyes and dont forget it.
>
> The hopefully saving grace I can see is these execs still only think in
> terms of the domestic US and 1st world markets, Asia, China etc will
> make and sell non-locked kit and being the biggest market this will win.
> They also have a substantial own market in terms of their own content,
> not evryone buys US drivel.
>
> I hope so anyway...
>
> And as for "fair use", I believe it is a US term, not a NZ one (in terms
> of legalese) we enjoy fewer rights than a US consumer.


We do have an equivalent of "fair use" in New Zealand, with a similar
sounding term of "fair dealing" used in the Copyright Act 1994. Whilst you
wouldn't be able to claim defence to large scale copying of entire works,
there is sufficient provision to uphold fair and reasonable use.

From http://www.legislation.govt.nz/brows...t=pal_statutes

41.Incidental copying of copyright work-

(1)Copyright in a work is not infringed by-

(a)The incidental copying of the work in an artistic work, a sound
recording, a film, a broadcast, or a cable programme; or

(b)The issue to the public of copies of an artistic work, the playing of a
sound recording, the showing of a film, the making of a broadcast, or the
inclusion of a cable programme in a cable programme service, in which a
copyright work has been incidentally copied; or

(c)The issue to the public of copies of a sound recording, film, broadcast,
or cable programme to which paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of this
subsection applies.

(2)For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a musical work,
words spoken or sung with music, or so much of a sound recording, broadcast,
or cable programme as includes a musical work or such words, shall not be
regarded as incidentally copied in another work if the musical work or, as
the case requires, such words or that sound recording, broadcast, or cable
programme is deliberately copied.


42.Criticism, review, and news reporting-

(1)Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of criticism or review, of
that or another work or of a performance of a work, does not infringe
copyright in the work if such fair dealing is accompanied by a sufficient
acknowledgement.

(2)Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of reporting current events by
means of a sound recording, film, broadcast, or cable programme does not
infringe copyright in the work.

(3)Fair dealing with a work (other than a photograph) for the purposes of
reporting current events by any means other than those referred to in
subsection (2) of this section does not infringe copyright in the work if
such fair dealing is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement.


43.Research or private study-

(1)Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of research or private study
does not infringe copyright in the work.

(2)For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that fair dealing with
a published edition for the purposes of research or private study does not
infringe copyright in either the typographical arrangement of the edition or
any literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work or part of a work in the
edition.

(3)In determining, for the purposes of subsection (1) of this section,
whether copying, by means of a reprographic process or by any other means,
constitutes fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, a
court shall have regard to-

(a)The purpose of the copying; and

(b)The nature of the work copied; and

(c)Whether the work could have been obtained within a reasonable time at an
ordinary commercial price; and

(d)The effect of the copying on the potential market for, or value of, the
work; and

(e)Where part of a work is copied, the amount and substantiality of the
part copied taken in relation to the whole work.

(4)Nothing in this section authorises the making of more than one copy of
the same work, or the same part of a work, on any one occasion.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Matthew Poole
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
In article <ujWed.22898$(E-Mail Removed)>, thing <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Geronimo wrote:

*SNIP*
>And as for "fair use", I believe it is a US term, not a NZ one (in terms
>of legalese) we enjoy fewer rights than a US consumer.
>

Not for long. Changes to the Copyright Act are on paper, and just have
to pass through Parliament. Unless Labour loses a snap election before
the Bill passes, it's a slam dunk.

>Our big dangers are
>
>1) Helen Clark selling our souls to get a US trade agreement, we get to
>sell a piddling amount of lamb to the US, while domestically we continue
>to be raped by the US. At what point does our Government see our future
>is wthin Asia as that's where we are?
>

I'd be more concerned that National will sell out. Helen's told the US
where to stick it before, and will do so again. Don, particularly if he
has to keep Rodders sweet to stay in power, is far more likely to accede
to Yank demands.
They're also more likely to scrap the fair use provisions in the Bill if
they were to win a snap election before the Bill passes. Make no
mistake about it, National/ACT will sell out to corporate interests if
it will help them, and **** the consumer.
Consider, also, that the Bill is a Labour initiative. If they were
planning to sell out to the US over IP, why bother?

>2) OZ selling its soul first, then it becomes very hard for us not to
>follow suit, if not impossible.
>

Too late. They already sold out, and with Howard's increased majority
it seems fairly certain that the enabling legislation (bringing, amongst
other things, alignment of copyright laws with the DMCA, and recognition
of US software patents) will pass. This despite much anger from the
Aussie public, who see the entire agreement as the rogering of West
Island that it is.

>For me, I do not buy CD's anymore, because I object to paying 30+ for a
>few tracks on a CD the rest I do not want. And I still have my vinyl
>collection so why pay twice?
>

*SNIP*
Why do you think RIAA are so anti music sharing? They want to sell you
the packaged crap, with two good singles and 16 tracks of dross, and the
only way they can do that is by denying you the ability to hear an album
without paying for it. Think I'm exaggerating? Consider this: The
music industry was against the idea of listening stations in music
stores!

--
Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
"Veni, vidi, velcro...
I came, I saw, I stuck around"

My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-24-2004
thing wrote:
> Our big dangers are
> 1) Helen Clark selling our souls to get a US trade agreement, we get to
> sell a piddling amount of lamb to the US, while domestically we continue
> to be raped by the US. At what point does our Government see our future
> is wthin Asia as that's where we are?
>
> 2) OZ selling its soul first, then it becomes very hard for us not to
> follow suit, if not impossible.


It's already happened. Aust has signed up a "free" trade agreement with
USA, which has the opposite effect to what most people would think of as
free. Apparently, the agreement extends USA copyright and patent laws to
Aust which will be good for the big USA corporates, but bad for Aust
consumers and artists.

Luckily for us, Helen and her mob have resisted succoming to USA demands.
Historically, I have voted National but I'm not so sure now as they seem to
be showing signs of becoming puppets like Blair and Howard.

> I watch virtually no TV because the adverts have ruined films, the
> remainder of the TV content is 99% garbage only fit for the morons
> amongst us. I do not listen to the radio anymore because of the
> frequency and length of the adverts.


I find that National Radio is quite good. News items are more factual than
the infotainment that is dished up on TV. The opinion stuff on Saturday
and Sunday mornings can be interesting, too.


Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Matthew Poole
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2004
In article <lXWed.969$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Clarity" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>"thing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:ujWed.22898$(E-Mail Removed)...

*SNIP*
>We do have an equivalent of "fair use" in New Zealand, with a similar
>sounding term of "fair dealing" used in the Copyright Act 1994. Whilst you
>wouldn't be able to claim defence to large scale copying of entire works,
>there is sufficient provision to uphold fair and reasonable use.
>

*SNIP*

I suggest you look a little more closely.
The US doctrine of "fair use" allows for format shifting. NZ law
specifically DENIES that right to the consumer. Even recording a TV
show is illegal in this country if you store that recording. You are
allowed ONLY to store it for as long as it takes you to watch it, unless
you wish to make a complaint.
And don't even think about ripping CDs to MP3 to play in your car.
Absolutely, totally verboten. Even copying CDs so that you don't have
to keep the originals in your car is illegal. You seem to know so
much about the Copyright Act, I don't have to tell you that, though.

--
Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
"Veni, vidi, velcro...
I came, I saw, I stuck around"

My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
 
Reply With Quote
 
Clarity
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2004
"Matthew Poole" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:clhfsp$ekl$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <lXWed.969$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Clarity"

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >"thing" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:ujWed.22898$(E-Mail Removed)...

> *SNIP*
> >We do have an equivalent of "fair use" in New Zealand, with a similar
> >sounding term of "fair dealing" used in the Copyright Act 1994. Whilst

you
> >wouldn't be able to claim defence to large scale copying of entire works,
> >there is sufficient provision to uphold fair and reasonable use.
> >

> *SNIP*
>
> I suggest you look a little more closely.
> The US doctrine of "fair use" allows for format shifting. NZ law
> specifically DENIES that right to the consumer. Even recording a TV
> show is illegal in this country if you store that recording. You are
> allowed ONLY to store it for as long as it takes you to watch it, unless
> you wish to make a complaint.


Could you please refer me to the section of legislation that "specifically
DENIES" such a process, as I would be interested in doing a bit more
research on the issue.

I am aware the US definition of "fair use" is quite extensive, but there are
similar existing provisions in NZ as mentioned previously.

Specificly looking at Section 43, determination is made based upon a number
of criteria when considered in light of research or private study. I would
be interested in your comments on the points raised in this section and
whether you consider them relevant to matters of copyright in general...

(1)Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of research or private study
does not infringe copyright in the work.

(2)For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that fair dealing with
a published edition for the purposes of research or private study does not
infringe copyright in either the typographical arrangement of the edition or
any literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work or part of a work in the
edition.

(3)In determining, for the purposes of subsection (1) of this section,
whether copying, by means of a reprographic process or by any other means,
constitutes fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, a
court shall have regard to-

(a)The purpose of the copying; and
(b)The nature of the work copied; and
(c)Whether the work could have been obtained within a reasonable time at an
ordinary commercial price; and
(d)The effect of the copying on the potential market for, or value of, the
work; and
(e)Where part of a work is copied, the amount and substantiality of the
part copied taken in relation to the whole work.

(4)Nothing in this section authorises the making of more than one copy of
the same work, or the same part of a work, on any one occasion.


 
Reply With Quote
 
BTMO
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2004

"Clarity" <> wrote

>> I suggest you look a little more closely.
>> The US doctrine of "fair use" allows for format shifting. NZ law
>> specifically DENIES that right to the consumer. Even recording a TV
>> show is illegal in this country if you store that recording. You are
>> allowed ONLY to store it for as long as it takes you to watch it, unless
>> you wish to make a complaint.

>
> Could you please refer me to the section of legislation that "specifically
> DENIES" such a process, as I would be interested in doing a bit more
> research on the issue.


The Copyright Act.

> I am aware the US definition of "fair use" is quite extensive, but there
> are
> similar existing provisions in NZ as mentioned previously.
>
> Specificly looking at Section 43, determination is made based upon a
> number
> of criteria when considered in light of research or private study. I
> would
> be interested in your comments on the points raised in this section and
> whether you consider them relevant to matters of copyright in general...
>
> (1)Fair dealing with a work for the purposes of research or private study
> does not infringe copyright in the work.


Does this include copy of the complete work for your convenience? aka -
format shifting.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Matthew Poole
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2004
In article <9CXed.982$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Clarity" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>"Matthew Poole" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:clhfsp$ekl$(E-Mail Removed)...

*SNIP*
>Could you please refer me to the section of legislation that "specifically
>DENIES" such a process, as I would be interested in doing a bit more
>research on the issue.
>

Section 84, Copyright Act 1994.
Summarised, you may time-shift a TV, roadio or cable broadcast for as
long as it takes you to watch it at a more convenient time or forward a
copy with a complaint. Storage beyond the time taken to view or listen
to the recording is infringement.

>I am aware the US definition of "fair use" is quite extensive, but there are
>similar existing provisions in NZ as mentioned previously.
>

*SNIP*

There are provisions for study, critique or educational review. There
are no provisions for format shifting, no provisions for taking copies
of anything other than a single backup copy of computer software for
which you own the originals - You're not even allowed to take a copy of
your mate's WinXP CD to use instead of those crap "System Recovery"
disks that ship with most laptops and store-bought computers.

--
Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
"Veni, vidi, velcro...
I came, I saw, I stuck around"

My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
 
Reply With Quote
 
Clarity
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2004
"Matthew Poole" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:clhjm7$hej$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <9CXed.982$(E-Mail Removed)>, "Clarity"

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >"Matthew Poole" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:clhfsp$ekl$(E-Mail Removed)...

> *SNIP*
> >Could you please refer me to the section of legislation that

"specifically
> >DENIES" such a process, as I would be interested in doing a bit more
> >research on the issue.
> >

> Section 84, Copyright Act 1994.
> Summarised, you may time-shift a TV, roadio or cable broadcast for as
> long as it takes you to watch it at a more convenient time or forward a
> copy with a complaint. Storage beyond the time taken to view or listen
> to the recording is infringement.
>
> >I am aware the US definition of "fair use" is quite extensive, but there

are
> >similar existing provisions in NZ as mentioned previously.
> >

> *SNIP*
>
> There are provisions for study, critique or educational review. There
> are no provisions for format shifting, no provisions for taking copies
> of anything other than a single backup copy of computer software for
> which you own the originals - You're not even allowed to take a copy of
> your mate's WinXP CD to use instead of those crap "System Recovery"
> disks that ship with most laptops and store-bought computers.


Let us look at a theoretical (and potentially likely) example of someone who
may have recorded onto video/TIVO/HDD footage of the 911 events.

Time-limited format shifting is specificly allowed for as detailed in
Section 84. It would also appear that there are certain limited exemptions
based on particular sets of circumstances.

Based upon the following, and in your opinion, would it be reasonable to
assume (in conjunction with Section 43 - particularly 3d) that such a
recording would be legal to retain?

90 Recording for archival purposes-

(1)A recording of a broadcast or cable programme of a class prescribed by
regulations made under this Act, or a copy of such a recording, may be made
for the purpose of being placed in an archive maintained by a body
prescribed by regulations made under this Act, without infringing copyright
in the broadcast or programme or in any work included in the broadcast or
programme.
(2)A body shall not be prescribed for the purposes of subsection (1) of
this section if it is established or conducted for profit.

50 ``Archive''-

(a)Means-

(vi)Any collection of documents (within the meaning of
section 2 of the Official Information Act 1982) of historical significance
or public interest that is in the custody of and being maintained by a body,
whether incorporated or unincorporated, that does not keep and maintain the
collection for the purpose of deriving a profit;


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Get all certifications latest dumps to prepare your IT certification exam Angila C Programming 0 03-22-2011 03:10 PM
management rights for account. Raúl Gatón Miguelsanz MCSE 1 08-24-2007 02:03 AM
Digital Rights Management DRM - Downloaded songs Viper Computer Support 8 11-18-2006 02:40 AM
DRM Digital Rights Management Luke O'Malley Computer Support 3 08-12-2004 11:08 PM
Update for Windows Rights Management client 1.0 SwingingSi Computer Support 0 12-01-2003 09:42 AM



Advertisments