0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Three accusations. That's all it will take to have your internet disconnected in New Zealand.Three accusations. Three assumptions of guilt. Is that enough to get your connection terminated permanently and get you banned from the internet? According to a new New Zealand law that will come into force, it is. It wasn't like New Zealanders went down without a fight, ISPs, technology experts and activists alike protested until the very end with their government ignoring their calls and passing what may be one of the riskiest copyright laws the world has ever seen. The EFF highlighted the protest website developers are organizing to protest the new law. The protest is known as the internet blackout where participants turn their icons black to show their support for the protest against the “guilt upon accusation law” The meaning, of course, is that New Zealands internet would go black thanks to the new copyright law. There is even a remix contest where users can remix the Copywrong Song by CFF, Mike Corb and Luke Rowell. The EFF offers some details of what the S92a law really is:Section 92A comes into force on February 28th, and states:(1) An Internet service provider must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances, of the account with that Internet service provider of a repeat infringer. (2) In subsection (1), repeat infringer means a person who repeatedly infringes the copyright in a work by using 1 or more of the Internet services of the Internet service provider to do a restricted act without the consent of the copyright owner. This isn't an entirely original framing of ISP duties. The chances are that this language was taken from the United States' very own DMCA, which in 512(i)(1)(A) states: “The limitations on liability established by this section shall apply to a service provider only if the service provider— (A) has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network of, a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network who are repeat infringers” But New Zealand experience demonstrates the dangers of simply adopting language from other countries without including a wider context. "Repeat infringer" in the DMCA is a term that was not defined in the law itself, and remains contentious here in the United States. Legal experts like David Nimmer have argued that "repeat infringer" means what it says: someone who has been repeatedly shown in court to have infringed, not simply accused of multiple infringement by rightsholders. There's certainly no universal acceptance in the home of the DMCA that rightsholders can force ISPs to throw US subscribers offline simply because they've been on the receiving end of (often inaccurate) notices by those same rightsholders. The New Zealand law doesn't clarify that element of "repeat infringers."1 In their draft Code of Conduct, New Zealand's ISPs have defensively accepted the widest possible interpretation, and conceded that they must take a "three strikes" response to rightsholder's accusations, rather than actual court convictions.
