Webstock does politics
Despite some of our members’ pinko commie Chomsky-loving hippy leanings, Webstock is not a politicial beast. But sometimes a political issue comes to you and you need to say something.
Changes to the much debated Copyright Act have recently been passed into law. (The wonderful Peter Gutmann spoke at a Webstock Mini last year on the (then) proposed changes.) Of particular note, and not in the good use of “particular note” way, has been a last-minute change to include Section 92a of the act, saying, in effect, “that ISPs have to have a policy to implement cutting off people’s Internet if they are accused of repeatedly infringing copyright.”
Others have written more eloquently and knowledgeably about this change and the process by which it occurred. Please go read these posts, we think it’s important.
Colin Jackson has a series of three posts:
- Cutting off your Internet if you are accused of infringement
- Ministers: why we changed the Copyright Act
- Weightless economy? Yeah, right.
and Mark Harris has started a blog focusing on copyright and intellectual property.
Webstock believes the internet and the web has fundamentally and irrevocably changed things.
There’s a real and exciting opportunity for New Zealand – as a nation – to benefit immensely from this change. We’re committed to helping in our own way and like to think that by learning from and connecting with some of the best in the biz’ (both the amazing speakers and the super smart attendees), bold and inspired ideas with the potential to immensely benefit our community and NZ, can come out of Webstock.
It’s sad and it’s wrong that our elected representatives in parliament fail us and remain wedded to outmoded models and beholden to opportunity-limiting dinosaur industries. It feels like fiddling while Rome burns. Boo Politicians boo.
Good on you for speaking out. I don’t know whether I’m more concerned about the implications of Section 92a or the lack of due process and good faith in the decision making of the Government and specifically Hon. Judith Tizard. She either has a poor grasp of the issues or has specifically chosen to override the rights of ordinary New Zealanders in favour of corporate copyright holders.
I’m just the opposite of a pinko Chomsky-lover but I agree that you have to say your piece.
The truly egregious thing about s92a is the assumption of guilt. Even people accused of the most awful crimes can’t be punished until they’re found guilty at trial. Assumption of innocence is a cornerstone of a civilised justice system. Anything else belongs back in the days of witch-burning.
Thanks for the link. As you may see from the first post, you’re partly to blame for the blog 😉 It’s only taken us 3 years, but now’s as good a time as any.
Bernard and Johnathan are right – the lack of due process and assumption of guilt are the worst parts and we can see a forerunner of ACTA in this legislation.