Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The file-sharing bill

340 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 Newer→ Last

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    but voting for it’s passage and/or adding insult to injury by getting rather coy about committing to repeal. Can’t have it both ways, sweeties.

    To be fair, Curran has already said she'd recommend a repeal bill to her caucus if the government enacts the termination provisions.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Curran has already said she'd recommend a repeal bill to her caucus

    I've seen that quoted in one article. One. Not said anywhere on her own thread on Labour's own blog despite repeated invitation to do so. And Curran supposedly has a comms background? Pffft

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Stephen Judd,

    Is it? The distinction between bills that have been through the select committee process (the Copyright stuff) and bills that have been rammed through without (CERRA) seems important to me.

    You're commenting about one theme of Dalziel's post (second sentence quoted below). I'm talking about the other (first sentence):

    But don’t blame Labour for voting for an agreed compromise rather than letting the bill remain in the form it was in when introduced. And don’t use the fact that the remaining stages were passed under an urgency motion when it meant nothing more than extended siting hours.

    I am certainly not holding Labour responsible for Natonal's use of urgency. What gets my goat are utterances like this:

    I am mindful of the fact that Labour introduced the original s92A that required termination to be the end point of a negotiated protocol between the ISPs and the rights holders. The agreement wasn’t reached...

    How hard is it to admit you got it wrong rather then distort matters so your hands seem clean? Integrity is an attractive quality.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Russell Brown,

    To be fair, Curran has already said she’d recommend a repeal bill to her caucus if the government enacts the termination provisions.

    And I’m sure we’ll all be eagerly awaiting a clear, unambiguous statement of policy from Labour’s communications and IT spokeswoman before the election. Won’t we?

    BTW, Russell, I do agree with you that this act is quite bad enough without the Orwellian hyperbole but believe me making a "recommendation" to caucus is a very long way from a solid policy commitment. And Curran knows it.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • SHG,

    Right-wing mouthpiece Idiot/Savant had this to say about Curran's "commitment":

    'Forgive my suspicion, but we all know that “we’ll consider it” is soothing politician-speak for FOAD'

    nup • Since Oct 2010 • 77 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    BTW, Russell, I do agree with you that this act is quite bad enough without the Orwellian hyperbole but believe me making a “recommendation” to caucus is a very long way from a solid policy commitment. And Curran knows it.

    Yes, I’m sure she does know that.

    The party has, since Curran got involved with the issue, formally and consistently opposed termination as a remedy. National appears to have insisted on it.

    People might not agree with the compromise in getting termination made inactive in the bill as it was passed -- it's a matter of political taste -- but simply voting against it would have produced a worse result.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Greg Dawson, in reply to SHG,

    Right-wing mouthpiece Idiot/Savant...

    Seriously I'm not sure my irony gland can handle this so early in the morning.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 294 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Not the filesharing bill, no. That's in the US position on TPPA.

    Rick Shera has just confirmed for me that Russell is right about this.

    Nothing on TPMs in new Act but under #TPPA breaking a TPM would count as a strike even if underlying material out of #copyright

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Sacha,

    Rick Shera has just confirmed for me that Russell is right about this.

    Nothing on TPMs in new Act but under #TPPA breaking a TPM would count as a strike even if underlying material out of #copyright

    The US stance on TPPA would not only extinguish any fair-use rights to defeat a technical protection measure, it would protect a form of TPM – region coding – that has never been protected under NZ law (including the 2008 copyright amendment bill from which the file-sharing part was held back).

    Pricks. But even that’s not in any draft – it’s just their extreme negotiating stance.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Good. Seems at least John Pagani has been given marching orders from Labour. More.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Lianne Dalziel seems to have given an answer in passing.

    Essentially we couldn’t vote for Gareth’s amendments when we had agreed a compromise on the bill with the government.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sacha,

    John Pagani

    Discussed by Danyl's commenters. Pagani even joins in:

    But the hard issue for Labour is that pubic opinion iapproves of the Government’s direction. I’m not seeing your commenters engage with that , other than to assume it’s all because Labour hasn’t whacked the Government hard enough. I think it’s true that Labour could have attacked them harder, especially in the last couple of weeks when they inflicted a few of their own wounds just as National left some huge openings. But would that have changed the high approval ratings the government is getting? Not enough.

    That’s not a comfortable position for the left to be in, but it’s one that has to be dealt with and no amount of abuse of me will change it.

    Someone on talkback this morning argued, ‘All Labour has to do is ask “are you better off now than you were three years ago?”‘. Most people aren’t better off, and a few are much better off as a result of being looked after very well by the National Government. Why isn’t that a winning combo? Is it because Labour has done such a poor job of opposing – or is it because voters have given the Government a pass in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, earthquakes and relief that they haven’t launched another Mother of All Budgets?

    Could we do beter at inspiring and motivating; and at managing our own stuff? Absolutely. We can do better at selling our values as well. But is that a satisfactory explanation for the state of the polls? Only in a world where we pretend voters want exactly what DimPost commenters want. But that is not the real world.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Just gets better. Pagani posts a response at his own blog titled "Does replying to trolls only encourage them?".

    Danyl also posted "The blogger’s reply to the strategist" earlier, but his other thread seems better.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    You should see Pagani's twitter feed. Does he realise other people can read what he's writing ?

    Pagani also had a crack at me in his post. At the risk of linkwhoring here's my exasperated response.

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to ScottY,

    Pagani's twitter feed

    Had to agree with you that his punchline was jawdrop genius:

    If only I could silence them.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to ScottY,

    Pagani also had a crack at me in his post. At the risk of linkwhoring here’s my exasperated response.

    We do not have this “linkwhoring” concept here. I find it kind of silly. If you wrote something you think is interesting, link away.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Sacha,

    Just gets better. Pagani posts a response at his own blog titled “Does replying to trolls only encourage them?”.

    Well, John, until a few short weeks ago (apparently) you were a senior advisor to the leader of the Opposition in our House of Representatives -- and I presume you weren't working pro bono or getting paid by the Labour Party.

    When any critique of our elected representatives is dismissed as "trolling", the term is meaningless and someone needs a long spell on the political naughty step until they get their heads around the concept of representative democracy.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Audrey Young is a tad confused.

    Apparently Labour's craven behaviour over CERA and suchlike is *not* evidence that they have been following Pagani's advice for the last 20 months while he has been Goff's main comms advisor.

    If Pagani has been giving such advice they haven't been listening. If they had been listening, Pagani might not be a former adviser.

    Uh huh. She also somehow convinces herself that Trotter's advocacy of moving away from identity politics towards appealing to the 'Waitakere Man' is somehow a shift to the left.

    At first glance, Pagani and Trotter would be appear to be on opposite sides of the argument - given that Trotter is calling for a hard left turn. But actually their respective cases have a common theme: both are arguing that Labour is making a hash of connecting with people.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to Sacha,

    Labour is making a hash of connecting with people.

    It surely is that.
    To quote an FB exchange with my brother yesterday:

    Brother - "I would really like the [Labour] Party to actually stand for something other than being re-elected" - Dimpost comments section.

    Me - Even if that's all it stands for, it's still doing a really fucking shit job of standing for it!

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Sacha,

    Apparently Labour’s craven behaviour over CERA and suchlike is *not* evidence that they have been following Pagani’s advice for the last 20 months while he has been Goff’s main comms advisor.

    I think Pagani's stuff is extremely ropey, but I can also see the argument that Labour would be making a rod for its own back by voting against CERA. It would not have stopped the bill.

    What Labour should do now is emphasise its Christchurch MPs' connection with the city -- Dalziel, Dyson and Burns have been impressive, and they're the ones who can credibly say "This is what we warned of, this is what our amendments were design to prevent. But the government doesn't care about what Christchurch people think about Christchurch. It doesn't know what it's doing."

    In other words, make CERA a rod for National's own back.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Jacqui Dunn, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Perhaps you should be the new adviser, Russell?

    Deepest, darkest Avondale… • Since Jul 2010 • 585 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    They were at their best keeping in touch when Mike Munro was handling communications. Once he left for a private sector job, those who replaced him didn't quite fill his shoes.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5441 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    What Labour should do now is emphasise its Christchurch MPs' connection with the city

    Coherent, well-crafted communication would be useful, yes

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    It would not have stopped the bill.

    I keep hearing this argument, but I just do not get it.

    For starters, if ever that were not the case, the govt. would therefore no longer have the confidence of the House and would have to call an election.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to 3410,

    For starters, if ever that were not the case, the govt. would therefore no longer have the confidence of the House and would have to call an election.

    uh, no. Only if the government fails to get a majority on a confidence or supply motion is that true. It's possible (and has happened) for the government to fail to pass legislation without bringing about an election.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.