Well 3 stikes and you out and with No solid evidence of it.

Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy to
disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid evidence or a
court order


Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free trade
talks.


http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/

Mary Hanna

"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy
> to
> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid evidence
> or a
> court order
>
>
> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free trade
> talks.
>
>
> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/

Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than a
civil offense. Nice.

Nik Coughlin

Mary Hanna wrote:
> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy
> to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
> evidence or a court order
> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free trade
> talks.
> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...rns-isps-into-
pirates-091104/

And - why is it being kept so secret?
What is there to hide?


http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...2576630080B002
"If correct, this is cause for alarm and shows a significant change in
ACTA's focus,� says InternetNZ spokesperson Jordan Carter.
“The New Zealand negotiators need to argue for ACTA to focus on the big
economic problems caused by commercial piracy. The government should clarify
this stance and should put more information about what exactly is under
discussion into the public domain - and the sooner the better," he says.

http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...257663006C3E16

Peter Hewett

On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and with No
solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:

>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>>
>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy
>> to
>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid evidence
>> or a
>> court order
>>
>>
>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free trade
>> talks.
>>
>>
>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>
>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than a
>civil offense. Nice.

It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
What is so bloody difficult about that?

--
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Anatole France.

Msg. Scooter

"Peter Hewett" <> wrote in message
news:hctsgp$mho$...
> Mary Hanna wrote:
>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>> policy
>> to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>> evidence or a court order
>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>> trade
>> talks.
>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...rns-isps-into-
> pirates-091104/
>
> And - why is it being kept so secret?
> What is there to hide?
>
>
> http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...2576630080B002
> "If correct, this is cause for alarm and shows a significant change in
> ACTA's focus,� says InternetNZ spokesperson Jordan Carter.
> “The New Zealand negotiators need to argue for ACTA to focus on the big
> economic problems caused by commercial piracy. The government should
> clarify
> this stance and should put more information about what exactly is under
> discussion into the public domain - and the sooner the better," he says.
>
> http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...257663006C3E16
>
>

Why "focus on the big economic problems caused by commercial piracy" and not
piracy itself? Are you suggesting that violation of copyright is ok so long
as you don't try to sell the goods you've pirated?

impossible

On Nov 5, 7:48*pm, Peter Hewett <nospamjy...@yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
> Mary Hanna wrote:
> > Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy
> > to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
> > evidence or a court order
> > Seems that we *will be in the same boat If Ozz is, *plus the US free trade
> > talks.
> >http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...rns-isps-into-
>
> pirates-091104/
>
> And - why is it being kept so secret?
> What is there to hide?

To try and prevent popular debate on the matter before state parties
have initially signed the treaty. those promoting the treaty have so
far been able to do a lot of work on it without interference from
opponents, protestors, etc.

The fundamental issue state parties are being confronted with is what
is a practical and effective way of protecting property interests in
creative works in a similar manner that owners of real estate and
other property are protected by society.

It is very difficult to argue with the proposition that owners of
intellectual property would expect, in a civilised society, that the
state provides mechanisms to help protect their property rights.

The issue then becomes one of how to protect these interests without
indue effect on ordinary human rights.

peterwn

On Nov 5, 5:56*pm, Mary Hanna <ma...@yahoo.co.cn> wrote:
> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes policy to
> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid evidence or a
> court order
>
> Seems that we *will be in the same boat If Ozz is, *plus the US free trade
> talks.
>
> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...-isps-into-pir...

I have responded to a similar thread on nz.comp as (because it is an
important matter):

> And - why is it being kept so secret?
> What is there to hide?

To try and prevent popular debate on the matter before state parties
have initially signed the treaty. those promoting the treaty have so
far been able to do a lot of work on it without interference from
opponents, protestors, etc.

The fundamental issue state parties are being confronted with is what
is a practical and effective way of protecting property interests in
creative works in a similar manner that owners of real estate and
other property are protected by society.

It is very difficult to argue with the proposition that owners of
intellectual property would expect, in a civilised society, that the
state provides mechanisms to help protect their property rights.

The issue then becomes one of how to protect these interests without
indue effect on ordinary human rights.

peterwn

"Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
> with No
> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>
>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>news:. ..
>>>
>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>> policy
>>> to
>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>> evidence
>>> or a
>>> court order
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>> trade
>>> talks.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>
>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than a
>>civil offense. Nice.
>
> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
> What is so bloody difficult about that?

Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.

I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to read
but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's item and
is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for around US$8000 a
copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I own legitimate
copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the 2nd book in a
trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.

I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do jail
time huh.

Nik Coughlin

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:48:57 +1300, Peter Hewett wrote:

> Mary Hanna wrote:
>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>> policy to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without
>> solid evidence or a court order
>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>> trade talks.
>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...rns-isps-into-
> pirates-091104/
>
> And - why is it being kept so secret? What is there to hide?
>
>
> http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/
EEC8CEAFC9C54B90CC2576630080B002
> "If correct, this is cause for alarm and shows a significant change in
> ACTA's focus,� says InternetNZ spokesperson Jordan Carter. “The New
> Zealand negotiators need to argue for ACTA to focus on the big economic
> problems caused by commercial piracy. The government should clarify this
> stance and should put more information about what exactly is under
> discussion into the public domain - and the sooner the better," he says.
>
> http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/
news/76BBB732F7361984CC257663006C3E16

The attempt to redefine copyright infringement (a civil offence) as
counterfeiting- (a criminal offence) is what disturbs me. No one has yet
explained to me exactly why why an Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
should be addressing copyright infringement. TRIPS, Berne Convention etc.
already address copyright.

Roger_Nickel

On , , Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:21:50 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and with No
solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:

>"Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
>> with No
>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>
>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>news: ...
>>>>
>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>> policy
>>>> to
>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>> evidence
>>>> or a
>>>> court order
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>> trade
>>>> talks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>
>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than a
>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>
>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>
>Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>
>I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to read
>but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's item and
>is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for around US$8000 a
>copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I own legitimate
>copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the 2nd book in a
>trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>
>I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do jail
>time huh.

In a simplified explanation to you, I would say "Yes, you should be prepared to
jail time."
You acknowledge that you know that what you are doing is wrong where you say
"illegally".
No matter how you attempt to justify it to yourself and me, you know whatyou did
was wrong. It is still theft if you take an illegal copy.

--
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Anatole France.

Msg. Scooter