Australian ISPs Soon To Become Copyright Cops 183
srjh writes "In the Australian Federal Government's latest assault on the internet, draft legislation has been released that allows network operators to intercept communications to ensure that their networks are being 'appropriately used.' Such legislation is particularly important given the interference of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy in a recent copyright lawsuit against iiNet, one of the largest ISPs in the country. Conroy called prominent filtering opponent iiNet's inaction over copyright infringement 'stunning,' whereas iiNet claimed that it would be illegal under current Australian law to intercept its users' downloads. While this latest legislation appears to be a concession of that point, the government is said to be watching the case closely and along with attempts to introduce a three-strikes law in Australia, it appears the law will be changed if the government dislikes the outcome of the case. The internet villain of the year just continues to earn his title."
HTTPS by Default (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Do we want the government watching us? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's probably worth reading between the lines here.
Along with trying to get ISPs to remove all pornography from the internet (laughable, yes, but if you look at the current legislation and current filtering policy, this is exactly what they want to do), the Australian government has been strongly backing copyright lawsuits against ISPs for not snooping on its users.
This isn't just "we're allowing you to monitor your own networks", it's "monitor your networks for us, or suffer the consequences".
Across the Sea (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile, across the sea in the United States, the 'Land of the Free,' various employees of various music/movie/video game agencies are taking notes. They're following this with a keen eye. If it works in Australia, why can't it work here?
Pretty soon, files such as Bellsouth Sucks.txt and Comcast Blows.rtf will be blocked in the US due to 'copyright infringement.'
Re:This will never happen. (Score:5, Insightful)
If a Double Dissolution happens Turnbull (or another Lib, I doubt Turnbull could run) that might just happen, so long as no-one utters the words "work choices" they should get in.
It's bad that we have to choose between two parties, one who wants to be a dictator over my home life and one who wants to be a dictator over my work life.
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:4, Insightful)
"The ballet box is the only way to get rid of these goons."
No it isn't, because Liberal will implement basically the same polcies. We don't have a viable third party so for the forseeable future we will be at the mercy of the same bunch of goons (Labour/Liberal).
Re:This will never happen. (Score:4, Insightful)
you've described the voting system correctly in all but name - it is NOT first past the post. It IS preferential. First-past-the-post describes the one vote, winner takes all (without having the win the majority) system that is employed in the US.
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:3, Insightful)
We've got a saying around here: If elections could change anything, they would be prohibited.
The way governments are expanding their power all across the western "democracies", the only thing that will be able to change anything is a ballet with U.
For the time being, teaching people how to use foreign VPNs is still adequate. It's just a matter of time before shit will hit the fan, though. Oppression never ends peacefully, unfortunately.
Australia, who are you? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just don't understand where this government's sentiment comes from!! I live in a country that is full of people who are easy going, enjoy life, and who are generally quite non-idealistic - we do not tend to have the passion for politics and causes and pep-talks that seems to drive a lot of US-centric life. And yet the government takes these crazy stands that are SO against the Australian way of living!!
Re:Do we want the government watching us? (Score:0, Insightful)
When it comes to having a choice between private enterprise providing a good or service and the government providing that good or service,
I disagree, the government is accountable to me once every four years, a private corporation never has to ask for my consent or co-operation. In addition to this, the governement does not have a profit motive where as a corporation must not only be making a profit they must also be increasing shareholder value. So either way the money needed to run the service comes from my pocket, with the government I get a say in how well they are spending and they dont need to make increasing ammounts of profit on it.
That's naive. You've got a say in what your government does? Where do you live and who made you believe that? Happy-fairy land? Without the sarcasm: governments are profit-driven, too. For them it's not money, it's power and votes. They optimise their fake promises and claims to increase their share of power. They also invest their power to pass laws, pass contracts to corporations, etc. to further increase their power and wealth. Governments are horribly inefficient and wasteful because it's not their money, they are not accountable for it and they benefit from spending it.
Private corporations aren't much better, either. I give you that. At least they usually don't have the same power for abuse as the government has.
As for this bit of stupidity, it will never pass parliament as the internet filter never passed parliament, its already been voted down
The thing with politicians is, they try until they get it through. They will not stop until they will have gotten what they want. No matter how often they have to try, no matter what shady tricks they have to use. If need be, they'll just ignore laws and do what they want. They'll get away with it because of their immunity. Three-strikes in France, censorship in Germany, databases in the UK, censorship in AU, etc. they all keep going until they get what they want, no matter how often they get turned down, they'll get it through bit by bit and there's nothing you can do about it.
Re:HTTPS by Default (Score:4, Insightful)
It's stopped by the stupid valid certificate requirement.
Australia is the testbed. (Score:4, Insightful)
If successful, then it's the UK, then the US, then the rest of the world.
By the way, if governments cared about other things as much as they care about copyright infringement, things would be so much better...
Re:Do we want the government watching us? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mesh network (poll) (Score:5, Insightful)
Being australian, and being part of the (very muchly mostly useless) mesh network project in AU, here's my thoughts:
#1- Australian landscape (mountains, bush, vast distances) isn't compatible with mesh networks.
#2 - You need to get the connection to the internet at some stage.
Re:HTTPS by Default (Score:3, Insightful)
for a start, the backlash from every person and business that uses banking websites?
Re:Do we want the government watching us? (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly,
When push comes to shove you can always count on a polly's survival instinct. All you have to do is convince them they are about to lose their job. Most people have no say in government because they don't get involved. Become part of an interest group like the EFA or a the very least write a letter. All Western Australian's got a say in Daylight Savings changes earlier in the year, despite the fact it did not pass (I voted YES) I did get my say. There is no way you can say you cant change government, most people just say that to console themselves with the fact they never tried.
Re:Mesh network (poll) (Score:5, Insightful)
And how do you propose to link this mesh network to other networks? Its not like you can just plug into the Southern Cross Cable or Australia-Japan Cable to get connectivity to the outside world. Nor can you just plug into fiber links between all the different isolated towns and cities that would be part of this network (and even if it was possible to string up enough wireless boxes to go from Sydney to Melbourne, the latency would be so big as to render it unusable).
Re:Draconian (Score:4, Insightful)
I just call him Senator Conjob, it's shorter.
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:2, Insightful)
All power corrupts... absolute power corrupts absolutely.
If any other parties will introduce the same policies, it sounds like it might be time for a public uprising... VIVE LA REVOLUTION!
Re:Do we want the government watching us? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:1, Insightful)
The dreaded "two-party system". So I guess the US is not the only country forced to choose between this douche or that douche. Although technically we still live in a representative democracy, the two major parties have waged an effective campaign to brainwash people and setup walls to keep anyone else out. The only difference between the parties here is their corporate sponsors. People often tell me I'm throwing away my vote by voting for a 3rd party, but I think it's the people who vote for either of the two major parties that are throwing away their vote. Most of our politicians belong in tabloids, not Congress. It's an embarrassment.
Re:Stephen Conroy (Score:3, Insightful)