Posts by Kyle Matthews
-
Why would there be a lesser level of protection for my personal communications just because their over one sort of network and not another?
Well that's a fair argument.
The one that gets spouted here and elsewhere that "service providers shouldn't have to have some responsibility for how their service is used" is weak and has plenty of examples to counter it.
-
I pay the district and regional councils for my water (via rates). Are they responsible if I drown someone
District councils have the job, if you install a swimming pool at your house, of making sure that it is fenced, and safe.
For every example you come up with, there's an exception which disproves it, or a counter-example. It's a null argument.
-
I struggle with this strange concept. If you build a road do you make sure thieves are not allowed to drive on them?
Well, governments build roads, and they tend to provide traffic policing. And city councils build roads and they provide parking inspectors.
I guess my point is, Rich said responsibility for how a service is used, doesn't apply to "many other services". There are a bunch of services that it does apply to, in one way or the other, and a bunch that it doesn't.
It's not an argument that strengthens either side, because we can all think of examples in society that fall on either side, there's no principle in play here.
-
And I sure expect a hell of a lot better than being told by Cullen what we just have wait until after the election for the costings of his stimulus package.
Actually, I'm not sure he was hopeful of your vote.
Anyway, I used to work doing research for a student union, including making these sorts of calculations. Acknolwedging that there are unknown variables (1 how many students will be studying in four years - economic downturns lead to unemployment which lead to higher enrolments, 2 how small the percentage of people will be that don't apply for an allowance), the $210 million figure is pretty good.
If National haven't attacked it yet, based on their own research, they're either 1. getting slow, or 2. noting that it's not a bad estimate.
-
or become fashion designers, film-makers, musicians, etc..
I should point out, that there are top quality courses in Dunedin for all three of these things. The polytech has a good fashion design course, there's the a postgraduate diploma in natural history filmmaking at the university, working with the Natural History Unit, and there's a contemporary rock course which is pumping out talented young bands, headed by a Dr Graeme Downes.
The list of careers that you are unlikely to go to a tertiary institution to learn, grows shorter every year.
And the Labour government have already reversed the National govt's disasterous treatment of apprenticeships, which is addressing our shortage of various trades staff.
-
Doesn't apply to many other services. Car makers and oil companies aren't responsible for the dangerous use of their products.
Well, neither of those things are services.
Maybe car rental company would be a better example.
-
Well, it might be nice if we actually had some healthily sceptical and informed analysis from the media. (If you want to go there, how many students are getting in hock to eat? Really?)
Only if they also ask how many welfare beneficiaries are getting into hock to eat. Ah wait... none. Again, the questions that are asked about students, aren't asked about anyone else.
Kyle: You'd think this would be one of those moments in human affairs where no press release is taken at face value, and further hard questions are always needed.
I didn't take anything at face value. I went to the Ministry of Education web site and downloaded some reports and looked at them and did some calculations. An additional $210 million seems about right.
-
They then send a C&D to the network provider saying "this IP address, this time, this file, this protocol" and the provider does the leg work of identifying you.
But if it was for some sort of disputes tribunal, which is what people were suggesting, the ISP would have to provide that information to the tribunal, under some sort of process.
-
Under current law, these would be a breach of privacy. My understanding of S92A suggests that the ISP may terminate the access but is under no compulsion to release any other data to the copyright holder other than; "it's done".
Yup. But for it to be a process in which, at very least, some evidence is provided of breach of copyright, that would have to come from the ISP. Otherwise everyone would just say "nah, I didn't" and it would go nowhere.
-
Can we pursue discussion on the idea here? Is there any major obstacle to it in principle?
I think the technicalities might be too much for a disputes type tribunal. Many of the cases that come before a tribunal, the facts are not disputed, it's the outcome that is disputed. Goods were purchased, they weren't exactly as advertised or didn't last, how should it now be resolved?
For one thing, a copyright holder might need to get information from a third party (isp) about the extent of any breach - how long, how much, how many times etc. These are disputed facts.
And then what is the value/lost income of that breach? There would need to be some guidelines, either in the law, or set by a court.