×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

P2P Traffic Drops 10% After New NZ Law

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the stop-sharing dept.

Piracy 110

harryjohnston writes "Following the introduction of New Zealand's new copyright legislation, which we discussed last week, major ISP Orcon reports that international peer-to-peer traffic has dropped 10%. This might mean that the law is actually working to some extent, though experts say the effect will probably only be temporary."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Nice! (3, Insightful)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337490)

So 5% got a seedbox in Tonga after all, now the traffic will just be FTP instead of P2P.
The other 5% switched to Rapidshare and Co.

Re:Nice! (1)

don.g (6394) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337726)

After all, Tonga is a country well known for its fast and cheap internet and therefore an ideal place to locate seedboxes.

Re:Nice! (3, Informative)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337912)

actually yes. The Germans and other countries have their illegal streaming portals there.

Re:Nice! (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 3 years ago | (#37342860)

Actually no, they just have a domain registered with the Tongan NIC.

Re:Nice! (3, Funny)

adamofgreyskull (640712) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337762)

Or 10% are towards the end of their billing cycle and are trying to stay beneath their ridiculous data cap... ;)

Re:Nice! (1)

igreaterthanu (1942456) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337910)

I wouldn't think so. Orcon bills based on the day of the month the customer signed up.

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37340040)

No Orcon bills based on the day of the week rather than the customer in question. Pack of rip off artists, their metering is some of the worst out there. Its total fraud, how else can they explain days of 16GB up and then other days with negitive bandwidth usage. Its mental and fraudulent.

data interpretation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37342490)

It would be far more apt to say 90% of NZ filesharers don't give a rat's arse about the new law....

Re:Nice! (1)

delt0r (999393) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338386)

Most of my NZ friends have seed boxes because NZ internet is total crap.

Re:Nice! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37339288)

Good luck with seedboxes... so far, I've not found any reliable providers that won't just take your money and pretend that it is "Internet trouble". These companies remind me of the "DDL warez search engines" pre-BitTorrent days -- they promise a lot, but you will never find one that actually works.

Pick one: Reliable VPS in a country that logs the results and passes them on a silver platter to the *AA, or a VPS that just takes your cash and then gives you nothing but excuses, or even profanity.

Show me a seedbox site that actually is decent that isn't in the US or a country that is an ACTA signee, and I'll piss on a spark plug.

Re:Nice! (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#37341958)

And your description reminds me of the websites that promise to give you drivers, only to instead lead you into a maze of search pages that find other search engines, all laden with ads, through which you quest in the slender hope that the next link may be to an actual download to make your old hardware work.

There are a lot of pirate services operating under the radar - just a few tens of users, but very dedicated ones. I have also heard of (and once actually found) super-seedboxes hosted in IPv6 space only on academic networks. The old tradition of the dorm pirate network scaled up. The enforcement people don't monitor IPv6 yet, as there is hardly anyone there.

Re:Nice! (1)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | more than 3 years ago | (#37342972)

A question for knowledgeable Kiwi's.... does NZ to Australia traffic count as 'international' by Orcon's terms? (It may seem a stupid question, but Australia and NZ occasionally ignore the fact that we're separate countries).

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37345422)

it goes via the southern-cross cable, which charges like a wounded bull so you can bet it will be counted as international.

Hahaha. it failed. (3, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337492)

if its just 10% drop at the advent of the law, it means it outright failed.

moreover, they just made piracy 'cooler' and more worthy of doing for a lot of rebel types and kids.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (4, Informative)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337688)

Its worse than that some ISPs are only able to say they noticed a drop and other ISPs report no drop.

Since no notices are being set as of yet I expect it will recover and then exceed previous levels if no notices are sent.
The government said they would review the law if it failed to work so the rights holder may want it to fail.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (2)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337736)

How well are they publicising this law? Simply having the law in place does feck all if nobody knows about it.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337826)

Everyone will have herd about it except for possibly people who do not use the web. I guess a few may be unaware of the date it came in.

I think the education from the government is meant to come from infringement/warning notices (no fines are initially given) but as no one is issuing these yet that may not happen.

It is also possible that people intending to infringe have avoided being the ones to sign up for being the account holder since this law has be going to come in for a couple of years thus they will not be directly punished for offence.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (2)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337694)

Internet access is very expensive in New Zealand, and virtually always data limited (5, 10, 25GB offers). You pay about 1$/GB.
Its insane. But there is no proper competition, a small population, and no demand from the users.

So people don't usually run Bittorrent et.al. so much, and renting DVDs is pretty popular.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (3, Informative)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337760)

Don't know who your friends are let me assure you that leeching is very much alive (no one seeds at $1-2.5/GB). It does not seem to be confined to one demographic either. The inability for some to stream at DVD def (slow connections) and having to pay for extra bandwith to watch on demand with ads makes torrenting very attractive.

I get annoyed at people who waste bandwidth re-downloading youtube. I do use this to rationalise the downloading of low quality mp3s.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345612)

NZAC? You're a hut on Mt Ruapehu?

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345774)

Yes im the chatterbox tucked in the corner.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337954)

if its just 10% drop at the advent of the law, it means it outright failed.

No, it is highly successful. The 10% of P2P that were used for piracy have stopped, while the 90% that were used for legitimate purposes are still there.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338428)

No, it is highly successful. The 10% of P2P that were used for piracy have stopped, while the 90% that were used for legitimate purposes are still there.

I know you can be idealistic on /. but come on. Almost all legal p2p downloads have mirrors for ftp/http downloads. Generally our internet is so slow that our bandwidth from the ISP limits the speed. The only reason I can think of is if the download is non resumeable and you could run into the time limit and be cut off (thereby not being able to download the file, not being able to clone the suse kernel from git is annoying). The 10 percent overhead from leaching is to be avoided.

There is legitimate torrent traffic but is probably a single figure percentage here.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

MikeDaSpike (1196169) | more than 3 years ago | (#37339598)

The internet needs a font for sarcasm.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345650)

Generally italics gives emphasis to sarcastic bits. But for clarity, change the colour to magenta.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37339234)

No, it is highly successful.

Do you have any sort of proof for that statement?

The 10% of P2P that were used for piracy have stopped, while the 90% that were used for legitimate purposes are still there.

Do you have any sort of proof for that statement?

In short, do you have any sort of proof regarding any part of this whatsoever? I'd sure be interested to read more, in that case.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | more than 3 years ago | (#37342912)

Wow, haven't seen a WHOOSH that big in a while now... Bravo!

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37339742)

Bravo, gnasher. Well-played.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37339410)

Not really. It implies that at least 10% of people who pirate would otherwise do without or *gasp* purchase it.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

dwandy (907337) | more than 3 years ago | (#37340858)

We have no idea of the success of this law as they're measuring the wrong thing.
Hopefully a decrease in p2p is not what the media publishing/distribution industries actually want. Hopefully they want increased revenue (more specifically profit, but in theory an increase in revenue is an increase in profit for this scenario). So unless we see an increase in sales that we can directly attribute to this law the law has failed regardless of the change in p2p traffic.
And to me this would still be measuring the wrong thing: as a society we want to measure not sales but some more abstract concept of how much quality art is being created.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#37341986)

It's hard to measure. It's hard even when looking at simple retail issues - how many downloaders would buy it? But when you try to factor in things like reduced TV viewership lowering the value of advertising time, it soon reaches the point where you can just make up any number you want.

Re:Hahaha. it failed. (1)

poofmeisterp (650750) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345192)

...moreover, they just made piracy 'cooler' and more worthy of doing for a lot of rebel types and kids.

Amen. Simple psychology will always hold.

<humor>
I believe 9% of the 10 heard about the new law and looked at their kid's computer for the first time.
</humor>

Actually, maybe that's not too far from the truth :)

domestic increases...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337496)

less INTERNATIONAL p2p traffic = more domestic p2p traffic. Think global, act local.......

Re:domestic increases...... (2)

petman (619526) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337642)

Are there p2p software that can prioritise domestic traffic over international traffic?

Re:domestic increases...... (1)

MikeDaSpike (1196169) | more than 3 years ago | (#37339658)

Yes.
Back when Portugal had ridiculous data limits on international traffic, there was a version of eMule that filtered the traffic. There was even a option to allow a certain amount of international traffic and then stop allowing international transfers. It was tailor made for portuguese people tho. I'm sure in NZ there's a ipfilter.dat for utorrent that only allows inside traffic.

Re:domestic increases...... (1)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | more than 3 years ago | (#37343024)

In Australia in the early days of P2P, there were apps that were specifically restricted to local networks.

CUZ NZ ARE PUZZYIES !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337500)

They NZ need to line them up and SHOOT ZEM !!

Who the fuck are the NZ again ??

Re:CUZ NZ ARE PUZZYIES !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337542)

Have you been drinking?

Re:CUZ NZ ARE PUZZYIES !! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337600)

They NZ need to line them up and SHOOT ZEM !!

Who the fuck are the NZ again ??

The NZ are NAZIs, but they left out the vowels. We all know Hebrew has no vowels, so that's why they just call themselves NZ, because they're JEWISH NAZIS who want to GAS THEMSELVES.

What about streaming? (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337512)

What about streaming?

Re:What about streaming? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337702)

From Youtube and so on? I'm doing that right now, listening to music that I don't own the CD of!

Or do I mean licenced? I can't keep up with it.

Re:What about streaming? (1)

black3d (1648913) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338312)

The specific law that has just been introduced relates only to P2P traffic.

Type of traffic (2)

BeTeK (2035870) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337526)

p2p traffic down 10%. vpn traffic up 10% :D

Re:Type of traffic (1)

kent_eh (543303) | more than 3 years ago | (#37339052)

Pretty much my first thought too.
A couple of private trackers that I'm on have recently reversed their policy on VPNs, now allowing them for existing members who can demonstrate an e-mail address or IP from NZ

And , yes, there are cappers, uploaders and seeders from NZ.
It's cool seeing travel shows from other places. I've learned a lot about the Kiwis since I joined.

the other 90% (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337528)

Are obviously legal p2p transfers.

No need to keep watching them.

None at all.

The harder you squeeze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337554)

the more systems will slip through your fingers...

No notices have been sent yet (3, Interesting)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337568)

Interestingly the law has yet to be used (or at least no news sites have reported it).

The 25 dollar charge couple with low chance of actually getting any money back have made the law seem pretty useless. I would think the fines would be around the minimum of 300 or so there is little chance of making a profit or even getting your money back.

The problem with putting the burden of proof on the accused is that judges will find it hard to award large damages (500+) since the account holder could not lock down his network and does not have the skill or money to prove it did not happen. Getting someone’s net cut off so they can't buy music legally is not the best business model either. If they have to get a friend to do it, there will be high chance of copywrite infringement immediately afterwards.

Some thing happened in Sweden. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337574)

First reports of "the law working", then a few months later everything was back to normal again.

VPN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337578)

Yeah, with laws like those, I would try to hide my traffic too.

Time Indeed for the Cypher Revolution (2)

Colio-Light (2456734) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337596)

What they fail to recognise, is that NZ is an isolated far away nation who are often a test bed for new things. Internet banking for instance, years and years ahead of the rest of the world because it was simple to do. Having weak politicians who can be used to purchase laws by foreign companies is another. As a by product of the fact that you DSL line has 'national' and 'international' traffic rates - NZ netizens are actually a bit more organised that many countries. For years and years, there have been NZ only direct connect hubs - long before torrenting - where friends and groups share very efficiently and easily, and more importantly on their own 'darker' yet very trusted networks. The government have bitten themselves rather hard with this one, as all this law will do is make it even more difficult than ever to police. this 'drop' in 'known torrent traffic' is hardly going to stop anything. All it proves, is that private communications can't be trusted to be handled by the government or any other commercial entity and that it is up to the individual to ensure their privacy themselves. But what about the 'think of the children' bandwagon i hear you ask? Well if the Queens own household can have their own image database being passed around and Her son is mates with a known dodgy flying with 'unnamed girls' documented as passengers landing on UK military bases - I really don't see how technology is going to stop it. Not until you do what used to be done when they are simply taken out to pasture, never to return to society.

Re:Time Indeed for the Cypher Revolution (1)

igreaterthanu (1942456) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337950)

Having weak politicians who can be used to purchase laws by foreign companies is another.

ORLY? [transparency.org]

Re:Time Indeed for the Cypher Revolution (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338392)

A few places above Sweden and Canada? That doesn't say a whole lot IMO.

Re:Time Indeed for the Cypher Revolution (4, Informative)

Colio-Light (2456734) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338424)

Not since the 80's with David Lange has NZ stood up against Americans with uranium on their breath and truly been able to say they are an individual country.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeHTziiFVx0 [youtube.com]

so yes, transparency.org might list NZ as high - but what does't get told much is the relationship between big business and MP's, and the fact that corporate law in NZ is the fastest changing in the world.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/warner-bros-sought-job-law-change-film-the-hobbit-nz-135087 [nbr.co.nz]

"Warner Brothers used the threat of filming The Hobbit movies elsewhere to gain changes to New Zealand's employment laws, it was reported tonight. An email obtained under the Official Information Act showed the production company wanted "stability" to film the movies in New Zealand and was worried about "grey areas" of employment law, Radio New Zealand reported."

http://tvnz.co.nz/technology-news/us-lobbied-nz-over-copyright-laws-wikileaks-cables-4149178 [tvnz.co.nz]

"The cables also show that the US offered to spend more than $500,000 to fund a recording industry-backed IP enforcement initiative. According to the cables, the US actively lobbied several cabinet members while New Zealand was working through its copyright reform in 2008"

"A February 2008 cable notes that Consumer Affairs Minister Judith Tizard and Trade Minister Phil Goff were presented with a list of shortfalls to submit as the legislation was being drafted. "Post has presented the list of noted shortfalls in the draft legislation to Minister Tizard (Consumer Affairs), Minister Goff (Trade) and to officials within the Ministry of Economic Development, the agency primarily responsible for drafting legislation and monitoring IP enforcement. "Post remains engaged with Bronwyn Turley, Senior MED Policy Advisor for IP issues to maintain a dialogue to address the needed technical corrections," the cable noted. New copyright laws were passed in April 2008."

  • Total costs: NZ $533,000 (US $386,158)
  • Start-up costs: NZ $78,000 (US $56,510)
  • Salaries: NZ $215,000 (US $155,768)
  • Operating costs: NZ $240,000 (US $173,880)
  • Start-up costs (NZ dollars):
  • Furnishings $25,000
  • IT costs (equipment) $45,000
  • Sundries $8,000
  • Salaries (NZ dollars):
  • Unit head $90,000
  • Intelligence and policy development $60,000
  • Licensing and enforcement officer $40,000
  • Administrative support $25,000
  • Operating costs (NZ dollars):
  • Accommodations (rental, utilities) $55,000
  • IT support $15,000
  • Legal costs (investigation, prosecution)$75,000
  • Training (internet piracy, law) $50,000
  • Travel costs $35,000
  • Employer liabilities $10,000

Re:Time Indeed for the Cypher Revolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37345500)

That was before National got in, or maybe its as I get older but I do think corruption in NZ politics is quite rife actually. The Christchurch earthquake gave the politicians special powers, which they used to rush this bill in under urgency when it had nothing to do with the earthquake, that's corruption right there isn't it? Its not the only urgent thing they passed under urgency with those laws either dodgy bastards.

10% is weak (4, Informative)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337606)

In Sweden after IPRED it was 30%, after half a year they were essentially back on the same curve as before. Everybody fears a token crackdown, like people speed everywhere but right after they've reduced speed on some road it's very wise to stick to the limit a while because it's always followed up by a bunch of controls on that road. It won't last since everybody knows they don't have the resources to go after everyone, it's just temporary.

Internet Traffic down 10%. (2)

Jason Pollock (45537) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337634)

It's the _total_ international internet traffic which is down 10%. Given that P2P forms 30-50% of an ISPs traffic (supposedly), that means that there has been a 20-33% drop in P2P traffic. So, while it sounds small, it is actually a large difference to P2P, all without a single $25 letter being sent out.

Re:Internet Traffic down 10%. (1)

Ignotus Non Audax (2455806) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337668)

The Internet is (or supposed to be) built upon the peer-to-peer principle anyway, so one may say all traffic is P2P.

Since when has the term P2P been twisted with the connotation of illegality I don't know. The word looks like another victim with the same fate as the term "hacker".

Re:Internet Traffic down 10%. (2)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337796)

Yes, but most systems are still designed using the server/client concept. Often with a large centralised server and lots of clients pulling down much more data than they send. Under a peer-to-peer concept there is no centralised server in the system (or at least if there is one, it's not as heavily relied upon as with a traditional model), and you may be transmitting as much as (or more than) you're receiving.

Both have their pros and cons depending on the user-base and network, and yes it's sad that P2P is becoming synonymous with piracy.

Re:Internet Traffic down 10%. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338420)

Your P2P protocol isn't anonymous enough until it come synonymous with child porn.

Maybe if piracy becomes popular enough on FreeNet, then all that nasty porn will get pushed out of caches and stick with the icky people.

Or even better, maybe someone will start a piracy based FreeNet darknet.

Re:Internet Traffic down 10%. (1)

styrotech (136124) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345940)

It's the _total_ international internet traffic which is down 10%.

No, Orcon reported a 10% drop in P2P traffic not total traffic. And other large ISPs reported [stuff.co.nz] either no drop in traffic or a slight drop in traffic.

The only reporting I've heard that said 10% of total traffic was on Ars Technica and they misquoted the article they linked to.

in other news... (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337734)

the use of alt.binaries and IRC DCC has had a huge resurgence.

Re:in other news... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338408)



The first rule of USENET, is you do not talk about USENET.

Article Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337758)

International *unencrypted and detectable* peer-to-peer traffic has dropped 10%.

Re:Article Correction (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338456)

Yep everyone in NZ just set the encryption on their torrent clients to "forced," thereby making it impossible for the ISPs to see what's going on unless they start monitoring swarms (and swarms with dynamic IPs in the same pool as their clients, if they don't want to be defeated by PeerBlock). Kiwis are known for their ingenuity and cleverness, and this isn't rocket science.

Re:Article Correction (1)

Dexter Herbivore (1322345) | more than 3 years ago | (#37343104)

Kiwis are known for their ingenuity and cleverness...

I thought it was the tendency for an unnatural attraction to sheep that Kiwis are famous for? (Sorry, I couldn't resist) :)

Re:Article Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37345310)

You're thinking of the Welsh.

Re:Article Correction (1)

styrotech (136124) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345974)

Based on your surname, I'm suspecting you probably have some personal experience of this?

How about the death penalty? Oh wait... (1)

mykos (1627575) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337764)

Re:How about the death penalty? Oh wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338324)

A few centuries ago, the penalty for unauthorized copying was breaking on the wheel.

[citation needed]

Re:How about the death penalty? Oh wait... (1)

MimeticLie (1866406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345232)

Re:How about the death penalty? Oh wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37345324)

so.. that quotes the torrentfreak article and adds only this:

I have doubts about these numbers. In any case, A.R.J. Turgot wrote the following in praise Gournay: “He could not see why this piece of cloth, for failing to conform to certain regulations, should be cut up into fragments of three ells in length, and why the unfortunate man who had made it should be ordered to pay a penalty, enough to reduce him and his family to poverty. He could not conceive why a workman, when making a piece of cloth, should be exposed to risks and expenses from which an idle man was exempt. He could not see of what use it might be that a manufactured piece of cloth should involve legal procedures and tedious discussions in order to establish whether it conformed to an extensive system of regulation, often difficult to understand, nor did he think that such discussions ought to be held between a manufacturer who cannot read and an inspector who cannot manufacture, nor that that inspector should yet be the final judge of the fortune of the unlucky man, etc.”

nothing about breaking wheels in there..

Real Reason (1)

mentil (1748130) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337778)

A recent dearth of good Linux .ISO releases. *cough*

In Sweden... (3, Informative)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337784)

...when they implemented the IPRED EU directive which gives the copyright lobby the right to force ISPs to give them the names of suspected filesharers, the traffic dropped by almost 30% on the day the law came into effect. However, it started increasing again almost immediately and a year later it's higher than ever before, and still increasing - just like it has been since the late 90s.

Re:In Sweden... (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337976)

What the expected fine if your are caught in Sweden?

As much as think the fines in the US are ridiculous, i just don't see how anything short of large fines could stop copy write infringement. There is no way cutting off someone’s internet can remain law for more than a decade, it will become to important to society.

My only other solution would be punish someone by sticking them behind a restrictive firewall that would allow web traffic but be plain annoying to make p2p and a lot of other stuff work with but that would cost ISPs too much and a single proxy would bypass it.

Re:In Sweden... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338072)

They get "day-fines", fines based on your salary. This is the latest cases, 60 yo man got 60 of them (2000 music files), a 15 yo guy got nothing, for 24 movies. The police just said that they have a special unit to deal with this now, they have about 50 cases that they are going to argue for prison and fines for.

Re:In Sweden... (1)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338526)

The usual punishment used to be 80 day-fines, which in Sweden would mean between 2400 SEK and 16000 SEK depending on the person's income (1 SEK is roughly 0.11 â). But in a recent case, not significantly dissimilar to earlier ones, the court suddenly went crazy and handed down a jail sentence (suspended, but that doesn't change the legal value) to a 60 year old man. No one really knows why they did that, but it's very convenient for Sweden's new prosecutors who are specialised on filesharing since they can now argue that there is a possibility of a jail sentence in future filesharing cases they are investigating. This gives them considerably more freedom to use search warrants and other invasive methods during the investigation.

Re:In Sweden... (1)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338542)

The â was supposed to be a euro-sign. Come on, Slashdot, this isn't the 1990s. Fix your input handling.

Re:In Sweden... (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 3 years ago | (#37342052)

On Brazil the copyright rent-seekers (as we all copyright holders now) succeded in getting laws that lead to jail time for offenders at the 90's. The result is that civil processes were replaced by criminal ones, and no not-for-profit infringer got punished after that.

Wait for media company profit anouncements. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37337872)

The claim is that p2p equals loss of revenue and profits. We can now see if this is true. This law causes a drop in traffic so there should be an increase in profits and/or sales posted from this time on.
From other stats though people who copy this stuff are the most likely to buy this stuff so my guess is that this loss of p2p won't show up in any sales figures. The people who used p2p will use social networks to find and copy the media.

OK (1)

ledow (319597) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337902)

I bet all those NZ guys are eagerly awaiting the price-drop on all media then, given that piracy is provably (*COUGH*) lessened by these laws and so they have no need to take legal action, extraneous measures (DRM etc.).

And sales of CD's, DVD's, Blu-Ray, etc. will go through the roof. Just you watch. Keep watching. Any second now. Wait for it. Just a minute longer...

Re:OK (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338382)

...almost there. Wait there is someone about to open the dooooor... nope! False alarm.

Downloading what? (2)

v(*_*)vvvv (233078) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337962)

I find the wording puzzling, since everything we download is, well, copyrighted. So the "illegal downloading of" is dependent on there being "illegal distribution" of copyrighted material by a non-copyright-holder, in which case, shouldn't the distributors be punished *first*?

And what about all the free legal distribution of copyrighted content by copyright holders, which in turn can easily be saved as mp3s? It is saying if someone downloads something via P2P they are criminal, but if they save a youtube stream to a file, they are model citizens.

Re:Downloading what? (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338038)

And what about all the free legal distribution of copyrighted content by copyright holders, which in turn can easily be saved as mp3s? It is saying if someone downloads something via P2P they are criminal, but if they save a youtube stream to a file, they are model citizens.

They still break the law but there is no way to catch them doing this (as the download was legal) so what’s the point to scaring potential voters.

Re:Downloading what? (1)

js_sebastian (946118) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338110)

And what about all the free legal distribution of copyrighted content by copyright holders, which in turn can easily be saved as mp3s? It is saying if someone downloads something via P2P they are criminal, but if they save a youtube stream to a file, they are model citizens.

They still break the law but there is no way to catch them doing this (as the download was legal) so what’s the point to scaring potential voters.

Saving a youtube video is illegal? That sounds like bullshit, try getting that to stick in court...

There are two possibilities. If whoever posted the video has the right to distribute it, then you obtained it from a legitimate source: if the copyright owner posted it on a publicly accessible website, then they are offering it to you and can't possibly claim you stole it. How is this different from recording a TV show, which is clearly legal pretty much everywhere? OTOH, If they don't have the right to distribute it, then they are violating copyright, but as far as the downloader is concerned, I have yet to hear of anyone being tried for just unauthorized downloading of copyrighted material (hint: all of the p2p copyright infringement lawsuits were about the re-distribution which is part of the process of a p2p download). Finally, youtube does not use DRM, so you are not violating the prohibition to removing restrictions by saving the video.

Re:Downloading what? (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338240)

You do know your suppose to delete TV show recording after you have watched them or within i think its 14 days (no one would waste money enforcing or detecting it).

In NZ and probably most over places there are laws that the police do not enforce because they are trivial and not worth it let alone wasting a judges time. I understand some countries get Police ten7 (NZ cop show) there will be a lot of people get minor punishments for far more serious offences .

I consider copywrite infringement (not stealing) to be of a similar or lesser infringement to intentionally driving over the speed limit but no so far as to get into the range where you would be given a ticket.

Re:Downloading what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338604)

Except that the jurisdiction is civil not criminal so the rights holder and their lawyers will be the ones prosecuting not the police. In fact the penalties for this law far exceed those given in the criminal court. As a comparison the maximum fine for drink driving causing death is $20,000. This relatively minor infringement carries a $15000 penalty. Further to this, the criminal courts are well known for giving seriously weak sentences. Short of extreme white collar crime and drug dealing, this law holds perhaps one of the most severe penalties financially for defendants, who unjustly are presumed guilty and will have a hard time proving their innocence.

We in New Zealand have had our sovereignty sold in the hopes of a free trade agreement with the USA. This law will not benefit a single New Zealander, it's undemocratic, unjust and unreasonable.

Ironically the only politicians with their heads around the law are the Greens who normally in areas of justice are the biggest lunatics in the country. Gareth Hughes may have won my vote however.

Re:Downloading what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37339448)

You do know your suppose to delete TV show recording after you have watched them or within i think its 14 days (no one would waste money enforcing or detecting it).

I have never heard about any laws saying this. If they really exist, when did they appear, and how is recording a television show any worse than recording a radio show on cassette? People have done that for decades, and they certainly didn't erase those within two weeks.

Re:Downloading what? (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345078)

They are both illegal here i'm pretty sure but since it is about as bloody trivial as it gets and would cost hundreds to prove for little payout.

The law is not ever worth enforcing and therefore everyone forgets it exists. NZ socity has a long history about not giving a shit about some forms of copywrite infringement that 90 percent probably don't see any issue with it and that its the individuals choice if they do it.http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/09/08/0218220/P2P-Traffic-Drops-10-After-New-NZ-Law#

Re:Downloading what? (1)

dbet (1607261) | more than 3 years ago | (#37340086)

It's absolutely not illegal to save a legal download, at least where I live.

Re:Downloading what? (1)

nzac (1822298) | more than 3 years ago | (#37345188)

Do you have a law that says if you don't see or accept the terms and condition you don't have to obey them. We still have stock standard copywrite law that you could argue covers this.

I'm fairly sure you are in violation of the "licence" they gave you by modifying the service or 4C
http://www.youtube.com/t/terms [youtube.com]

Getting the courts to care about when youtube may have trouble detecting it is a different issue.

Re:Downloading what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338246)

You always save a youtube stream. During download it *IS* stored on your HDD in temporary folder. There isn't *ANY* other way to view youtube "stream" since it's not stream at all.

Re:Downloading what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37345908)

Not necessarily. It could be saved to a tmpfs in RAM on *nix, or (in the unlikely event Origyn ever supports HTML5) the RAM: drive in AmigaOS/MorphOS/AROS.

And in other news... (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 3 years ago | (#37337996)

Encrypted IRC and NNTP traffic rose an astonishing 500%.

News at 11.

not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37338098)

everyone's busy playing deus ex and dead island. i'm serious, there haven't been any decent pc releases for months

No difference (2)

drmofe (523606) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338214)

I have not noticed any difference in total international traffic at the ISP which I run between now and before the new law came into force. I do notice more VPN and seedbox traffic on residential connections and less UDP torrent traffic.

I am also yet to see a copyright infringement notice properly formatted with the requirements of the new legislation. I have bot even received an automated form letter from a rights owner, as used to be the case on a regular basis.

No rightsowner, or agent thereof has been in contact, nor RIANZ or NZFACT to discuss the relationship between the rightsowners and the designated IPAPs.

P2P just in a lull... (1)

Ranzear (1082021) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338356)

Nobody stops to think maybe it's because no big game titles or movies came out this week? Way to declare victory when your opponent is off taking a nap.

Bah... (1)

koan (80826) | more than 3 years ago | (#37338384)

I am interested in what happens to the brick/online retail sector selling movies and music, did it increase? Stay the same?
What effect dies this actually have on spending and sales?

Or, being irritated with their ISP, will customers now double their efforts to pirate through other means?

OREALLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37341198)

Did they bother monitoring the amount of increased encrypted traffic?

On other news, bittorrent goes VPN.

back to school (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37341250)

Coincidence, me thinks... all the kids are back in school, teenagers who get their computers turned off by mom, etc.

What? (1)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 3 years ago | (#37341926)

Are we saying that NZ spam and p2p actually accounts for 10% of the whole world's internet traffic????

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?