Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 120258	2011-09-01 01:20:00	Live chat with TUANZ CEO Paul Brislen	nedkelly (9059)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1227972	2011-09-01 01:20:00	www.nzherald.co.nz He is online right now, I am not sure for how long though.	nedkelly (9059)
1227973	2011-09-01 02:09:00	Just finished. If you didnt get to the chat, heres some questions and answers Comment From Tristan Does this ban all torrent file sharing. 12:12 nzherald.co.nz: Hi, no not at all... the new law only relates to material that is subject to copyright ownership and which you haven't got permission to copy. If I put a file up on BitTorrent (or any other file sharing site) that contains my own copyright material, there's absolutely no problem with you downloading it. I've made it available so that's OK. The problem arises when you're sharing a file that has been uploaded without permission. 12:16 Comment From RK What if the files being shared are personal documents? 12:16 Paul Brislen: There's no definition of a "personal document" in the Act - if you're sending your own content, that's fine. If you're sending someone else's content, you need to have permission. 12:18 Comment From Sean Do you think people who use a proxy IP address could find a way around this law? 12:18 Paul Brislen: Using a proxy from overseas, setting up a secure tunnel and connecting, isn't illegal and would move the problem of downloading copyright material from NZ to wherever you connect - so the US or UK for example. The basic problem still exists - you're infringing on copyright material - but you've moved it from NZ's jurisdiction to another country's and made it potentially tougher to find you. 12:20 Comment From daniel How can this be policed and what are the penalties 12:21 Paul Brislen: The Ministry of Economic Development says it won't be monitoring or enforcing the new law with regard to websites themselves (YouTube for example). They'll strictly be looking at file sharing software like BitTorrent. Already the rights holders in the US and Europe are very active, seeding files onto these services with a view to capturing the IP addresses of anyone who downloads the file. While the new law comes into effect here today, the rights holders have been doing this for many years and all NZ ISPs have been receiving letters from various legal firms demanding they take down content or disconnect customers etc for infringing. Until now the ISPs have generally ignored these quasi-legal threats - from today on they can't. 12:23 Comment From callum Does a copyright holder have to alert the ISP that copyrighted content has been downloaded for the ISP to be aware of it? 12:24 Paul Brislen: The copyright holder doesn't have to notify the ISP but if they don't they can't find out who the downloader is - there's no legal way round the ISP. Under the new law the rights holders must provide fairly detailed information to the ISP (which the law calls an IPAP) about the offending, their rights to that material and what time, date (down to the second) the offending occurred. If that information isn't given, the ISP can ignore the notice. 12:25 Comment From Tim Are ISP's being asked to track / watch user connections to any torrent sites? 12:26 Paul Brislen: No, the ISPs aren't being asked to monitor anything. It's up to the rights holders to identify what they perceive to be offending and then report it to the ISP. The ISP charges the rights holder $25 to process the notice, and then will be able to identify the offender (or rather, the account holder - don't forget, I might pay the bill but someone visiting my house or even sitting outside in the car leaching off my wireless connection might be the downloader). 12:26 Comment From Teroy Alot of legitimate open source sites use torrents for distribution of software 12:27 Paul Brislen: they do indeed and the fear is that internet providers (like employers, free wifi providers and the rest) will simply try to block all file sharing software/torrent clients as a blanket ban. If that were technically possible it would interrupt all those legitimate uses of file sharing and that would probably include Skype which, I'm told, uses the same ports as Torrent files. 12:27 Comment From Anthony Do you think copy right holders will "swamp" ISP's with infringement notices? 12:28 Paul Brislen: I would hope they won't. Internationally they certainly have - in France it's rampant and in Australia ISP iiNet has been forced into court by rights holders sending tens of thousands of notices a week - far more than the ISP can process. In NZ the new law includes a provision for reimbursement of the ISP's costs - $25 per notice. I'd hope that means the rights holders will focus on the more costly cases rather than going after small-time offenders. 12:29 Comment From Rick In your opinion, is there any real privacy left in the Internet nowadays? 12:29 Paul Brislen: Yes there is, but you have to work at it. ;-) 12:30 Comment From Robert Why do MP’s keep referring to file sharing as illegal? All networking is file sharing. Is it because their knowledge of the industry is really that severely limited? Surely if they are that uninformed they shouldn’t be making laws on the subject. 12:31 Paul Brislen: Because they haven't understood how the internet works, how email works, what file sharing actually is or pretty much anything else about this bill. Plus they've adopted it as a kind of shorthand rather than writing "those scoundrels who want to watch television and are forced to download copies of TV shows off the internet because our broadcasters have bought the rights to the show and don't know what to do next". 12:32 Comment From CJ Is there anything in the pipeline that will look at other methods people will begin using? (online lockers, streaming, etc)? 12:32 Paul Brislen: The law doesn't specify any particular technology. The Ministry of Economic Development has, primiarily because all the other forms of potential offending are too difficult to police. This is one of the big problems with this particular Act - the ramifications of it haven't been considered and in effect the MED is forced to introduce a policing schedule built around one particular technology platform rather than trying to resolve the situation. 12:34 Comment From TheIntermediate How do you know what material has permission and what material doesn't? 12:34 Paul Brislen: You don't. 12:35 Comment From Dean What other countries have a similar law and to what extent have they succeeded or failed 12:36 Paul Brislen: Most first world countries have something similar, or are in the throes of rolling them out. Many have followed the US lead and introduced what the Americans call the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) which has had a lot of press in recent years. It doesn't stop here however. As part of the free trade agreements being conducted at the moment the US is pushing any signatories to sign up to its world view on copyright. New Zealand is part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) which consists of most of the Pacific rim countries - I spoke to them about this issue in Vietnam a few weeks ago and most of the delegates were concerned that they'd only ever heard from the US side of things and never heard from a users' group before. It's worth emailing your MP about this if you feel strongly enough. They tend to only hear from the rights holders and never from the users. Ask them why it is they support an Act that forces home owners/small businesses to carry the costs of enforcing a business model that no longer works. 12:38 Comment From Chris Is it no problem until third waning? 12:39 Paul Brislen: The process is that you'll be given two warnings before being sent off to face the Copyright Tribunal which can award up to $15,000 fine for each offense. However you can challenge each notice you receive and you can demand to attend the Tribunal hearing in person (they expect most hearings will be conducted on paper - that is, by email). there is no right of appeal if you don't like the outcome either - you can take it to the High Court to argue points of law, but that's it (and that's a costly approach). If the Tribunal appointed person hearing the case thinks you're guilty, you're guilty. 12:40 Comment From Josiah How do the ISPs differentiate between legal torrent uploads and illegal ones? 12:41 Paul Brislen: The ISP doesn't. It's up to the rights holder to determine that you've downloaded that file called The Terminator and that it's a movie and that they have the rights to it and that you haven't got the rights to download it. if they can't demonstrate that to the ISP (which will then check its records to determine if that file was downloaded and if so at what time and by whom) then the ISP rejects the claim. 12:42 Comment From Bob How are schools, universities, libraries, etc affected by this act? Are these places liable for the infringement of copyright by users on their network? 12:42 Paul Brislen: Any organization that offers internet access will be responsible for any/all downloading that goes on at that organization. So, schools, cafes, libraries, universities, businesses that let the staff surf the net - they will all need to consider the HR implications, the legal implications and look to implement some kind of technical solution. All of this is costly. Some organizations will simply shut down their free wifi on fear of being fined or even (eventually, if it's introduced) disconnected from the internet. Even if the organisation can prove that a particular individual downloaded the copyright material, my undertanding is the law doesn't care - it's the account holder who is repsonible for any/all illegal activity on that account. 12:43 Comment From Cameron Given the current process what's to stop someone on the 2nd infringement changing service providers, effectively starting from scratch with a new provider ? 12:43 Paul Brislen: nothing at all and that's one of the reasons why the ISPs are so unhappy with this piece of legislation. It will drive "churn" to competitors. 12:44 Comment From Kaypea Can a copyright holder fake the information in a IPAP? How does the ISP know that, that information is correct? 12:45 Paul Brislen: If the information the rights holder submits to the IPAP doesn't match what the IPAP sees on its records (ie if the time is wrong or the IP address is wrong) then it rejects the claim. 12:45 Comment From monica Hi Paul: What about the websites that offer free content like e books for free, software, would it be illegal to donwload from this sites now? Thanx 12:45 Paul Brislen: Those sites will still be all right IF they have permission to offer that material in public. If they don't have the rights holders' permission then they are breaking the law and you will be too if you download that material. 12:49 Comment From Anonymous Hi Paul - On behalf of Anonymous, I'd like to ask if you personally think this law is good, correct, well written and that the punishments it imposes are reasonable? 12:49 Paul Brislen: I think this piece of legislation is poorly drafted and serves only to upset end users, alienate ISPs and will do very little to stop those offenders who are at the busy end of the spectrum. The problem isn't one of copyright infringement, it's one of access to material. This act serves only to support a business model that no longer works in the internet age. Fortunately, there is a solution. Services in the US like Netflix offer content online as the customer wants it for a low monthly fee (about $NZ20) and it's working extremely well. Roughly one third of all US internet traffic is now Netflix and it will hit 50% by the end of the year. It's now bigger than Torrenting and customers love it. That's the answer to the problem of people downloading copyright material - make it easy for them to pay for it and they will. 12:50 Comment From Chris Isn't "seeding their own files" by the copyright holders with the purpose of catching downloaders, an illegal practice in itself? 12:51 Paul Brislen: I'm no lawyer but surely that's right..... this kind of "honeytrap" approach is pretty poor in my view and probably means the rights holder HAS made the file publicly available which would negate any claim brought against them. But I'm no lawyer... when I rule the world things will be different. 12:51 Comment From Dan Say for example I download some illegal content through a VPN or Proxy. If I open it on my computer and sent my NZ IP to the right holders can I be prosecuted ? (Bearing in mind it was downloaded through a VPN). Just wanting to clarify if the law only applies to downloading the content, not having the content on my machine... 12:52 Paul Brislen: I'm not sure why you would do that - if you've downloaded something from overseas via a proxy, why would you then tell the rights holders about it? 12:55 Comment From Dave Is it realistic to expect the model that Netflix operates under, to work in the NZ market with the exhorbitant data charges currently applicable for residential broadband use? 12:55 Paul Brislen: Yes it is - the ISPs would no doubt strike a deal similar to what's on offer today with iSky to offer the content and zero rate the data... ISPs like Orcon have already built content distribution networks (CDN) with a view to minimizing their international capacity needs. I'd sign up with an ISP that let me access Netflix or Hulu or anything similar. Comment From Sam What about US tv shows that we just don't get until well after they have aired overseas. Generally speaking we get movies at the same time now so why not tv? It seems as though broadcasters want a monopology on the market and aren't considering why people are downloading. Paul Brislen: TVNZ screened two episodes of Justified last month, then took the show off the air and moved it to some weird time slot. Justified is one of the highest rating shows in the US and is now in its third season. So why is it that our TV channels can't understand that people in New Zealand don't all watch Celebrity Cooking Master Gardner shows all the time? There's a wealth of good quality TV coming out of the US (and other places) that's better than ever before and unfortunately it's simply not made available in New Zealand in a timely fashion. 1:01 Paul Brislen: Can you imagine if it was the rugby - the All Blacks playing Australia. It's live in Australia, in the UK, South Africa and around the world but in New Zealand the TV network said "we're going to screen that game at a later date, when we're good and ready"... There would be a riot. If the rights holders don't make the content available, how is it they're making a "loss" every time someone watches a show online? 1:01 Paul Brislen: I'm a Doctor Who fan. I'm also online all the time, so I get spoilers from the marketing machine, from people who've already seen the show and so on. I watch it as soon as possible after it comes out in the UK. That makes me a criminal. I also watch it on TV when it screens here and I'll probably buy the DVDs as well, so there is no commercial loss for the rights holders. The problem isn't that I want it for free - the problem is I want it now, but the rights holders' business model doesn't allow that. 1:02 Comment From Grandad If I record a TV program on my video recorder and then give to someone else free of charge, am I breaking the law? Is not the program now in the public domain when its on TV? Is this not the same as file sharing. Someone has recorded a program and is now giving it to someone else, free of charge? That's file sharing, albeit in a very basic form, and probably not legal either... although we've all done it. 1:03 Comment From Simon G'day Paul - firstly, thanks for being here to assist with these queries. I'm pretty sure i know the answer here, but streaming sites which hold TV shows and can be watched instantly i am guessing is not covered by this issue, as the user isnt downloading - just watching a streamed episode. They would i presume be going after the site thats holding all these files for others to stream and watch .Is this correct? 1:04 Paul Brislen: You're still accessing material that is copyright so technicality it's a breach. However the Ministry of Economic Development has said it can't monitor sites like this (YouTube for example) and so will be concentrating on file sharing services like BitTorrent in the first instance. nzherald.co.nz: Well, that's all the time we have today. Thanks to Paul Brislen for taking the time to answer your questions. Unfortunately we had more questions than we could publish but thanks to everyone who participated in our live chat today.	Speedy Gonzales (78)
1227974	2011-09-01 02:12:00	Reading through the replay just now...	Chilling_Silence (9)
1