New Zealand Halts Internet Copyright Law Changes 216
phobonetik writes "The New Zealand Prime Minister announced his Government will throw out the controversial Section 92A of the Copyright Amendment (New Technologies) Act and start again. The proposed law changes contained 'guilty upon accusation, without appeal' clauses and heavy compliance costs to ISPs and businesses. The changes were hours away from being signed but a series of online protests, a petition on Government grounds, as well as public rebuttal by a large ISP and by Google contributed to the Government changing course and respecting the wishes of the IT industry."
Merry-go-round (Score:3, Interesting)
Democracy (Score:5, Interesting)
> The changes were hours away from being signed but a series of online protests
> (...) Government changing course and respecting the wishes of the IT industry.
So whats the point in going to vote in the first place if theres no guarantee that the will of the people will be mirrored in the actions of the elected goverment until mass protests fill up the streets (or tubes)?
It seems that we easily could just appoint a dictator for life once and then keep protesting against his decisions we dont like, it wouldnt in practice be any different to the current situation.
Either we have a democracy, in which case demonstrations and protests again the democratically elected goverment shouldnt be needed, or we dont, in which case we dont need elections.
Re:Light up the tubes! (Score:4, Interesting)
"Obama appointees help RIAA sue Teenagers" or "Government uses national security claim to protect the recording industry"
It's exactly this sort of thing that buttresses my doubts about democracy. I know you were going for catchy headlines, but both of them are grossly oversimplified.
As I noted the other day, [slashdot.org] the DOJ's brief is an attempt to uphold the constitutionality of the statutory damages that Copyright Act permits. That issue cuts both ways, because if you emasculate statutory damages completely, when a big label rips off an independent musician, the musician won't be able to take them to task.
And regarding ACTA, the recording industry is peanuts compared to other players involved there. All of the major pharmaceutical and chemical companies are involved with ACTA, and those industries are far more important than the RIAA, no matter how you look at it. If anything, the national security claim is aimed at protecting their interests, and the RIAA is just along for the ride.
So while a lot of comments are along the lines of "why doesn't the government listen to the people more", keep in mind that a lot of times people are ill-informed and likely to act based on emotion rather than reason.
Govt Stubborn To The End (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the tag "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense" could not be further from the truth!
After *Overwhelming* opposition via petitions, public outcry, comments from a "large ISP" and *Google* the "Govt" eventually backed down hours before this law passed.
This absolutely stinks of arrogance, grim determination and bloody-mindedness demonstrated by the "Govt" to try and *force* this law through despite widespread popular opinion and only backed-down at the last "conceivable moment".
If this was down to common sense the "Govt" would have abandonded this months ago or even at the earliest stages of discussion.
One way or another this law in some form is going to be passed. As other posts have said it will be pushed through some obscure law out of the publiic eye.
Obviously, the "Govt" do not think IT industry, Google and the *New Zealand People* are important enough to have an opinion.
Just look at the U.K. (where I live) to see what is happening.
Do now let this continue the fight is not over yet!
Any government should be the voice and representation of the people - we DO NOT serve the government for it's own purposes - THEY SERVE US.
Re:Democracy (Score:2, Interesting)
As the quote goes, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
As the other quote goes, democracy is the worst system there is, except for all the others.
Re:Democracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Absolutely agree - we better contact the police and ask for thier permission (as required by current law)!
They aren't done... (Score:3, Interesting)
They'll just backdoor it later.
This is why people have to stay vigilant. The same people who organized these protests, etc - they shouldn't sleep on this one, because I think it's quite likely that whoever took that provision out probably made a phone call right before doing so to big content and said something like the following:
"listen mate, i'm gonna have to strike that provision of the bill - the time just isn't right, but don't worry - we'll backdoor it later after the furor dies down."
It was a shady mafRIAA backroom deal (Score:5, Interesting)
Undoubtedly because it would have been the end of her political career in another way, if she was not retiring.
Scrap that, they picked someone on the way out to slip this in for them, it's an excellent way to find a fall guy, someone who won't be even be around to cop the backlash. The amendment was also made when it was clear Labour would not be getting re-elected. A party on it's way out so the new government could dodge some flak, if they had to can the legislation they can claim it's not their mess, and they get the brownie points for appearing to respond to the public backlash.
Does that sound like a shady mafRIAA backroom deal to you too?
You see, a government is expendable, if it pushes your dodgy legislation and becomes unpopular, it gets torn down at the next election, and the next batch of politicians are at your service, the one thing that remains constant is the players behind the scene you don't get to vote on.
Well back to the drawing board for the legislation. They've backed off, and will try again with something milder. Basically this kind of legislative push is intended to soften up the public and be more likely to accept whatever 'compromise' alternative law is offered.