From the article:
The music and movie industries insist that graduated response is "not about ISPs policing the internet, it's about ISPs responding to a high standard of evidence of infringement and illegal activity on their networks supplied by rights holders. More than anything it is about educating users."
It's not about the ISP's policing the internet? Put up your hand if you believe that *carefully keeps both hands down*. And as for 'high standard of evidence' -- the law says "... termination, in appropriate circumstances ..." without making any attempt at defining what those appropriate circumstances are.
Kiwi ISP's are rightly upset about this. They are vulnerable to both sides now: Their customers can sue for getting wrongfully cut off. And copyright holders can sue for them NOT cutting off their customers. Depending on what those 'appropriate circumstances' may be deemed to be. Also, the law suggests, but does not state, that the ISP could be responsible for monitoring copyright violations. Depending on the interpretation of those 'appropriate circumstances' again.
And as for actually doing something effective about piracy -- any pirate worth his salt will have no problem signing up under an assumed name whenever cut off. It's legitimate businesses, such as libraries and schools etc., that are vulnerable under this law. |
