Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Roger,
Just out of interest… to what extent does a New Zealand court have to consider access to a ‘fair’ trial in the destination country when considering an extradition request (witness the UK court that denied extratition to Jordan (?) of an alleged islamic extremist on these grounds).
It is certainly a matter to be considered.
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
Disabling the public URL that provides access to a file certainly meets this test.
Even if there are two URLs and you only disable one?
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
However if you complained to YouTube about their file they would disable it, and any links that redirected there (bit.ly etc) would similarly be disabled by virtue of the fact the main source link would be disabled.
My bit.ly example was just that, an example that I could quickly conjure up where two URLs point to the same data. To comply with the takedown stuff in the DMCA you actually have to remove the data, not just the URL. Perhaps another example:
imagine someone complained to Russell about publicaddress.net; he stops publicaddress.net from showing up, but we all know the ip address, so go there instead, which still works fine.
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
I think it goes something like this:
your post is currently at http://publicaddress.net/system/topic/3346/?i=50#post246560.
now imagine that someone decides your post is infringing.
they complain to Russell.
instead of Russell deleting your comment, or some of the words in it, Russell makes it so http://publicaddress.net/system/topic/3346/?i=50#post246560 doesn't go there.
go to http://publicaddress.net/system/topic/3346/?i=50, however, and it's still there.alternatively:
imagine the youtube video at http://bit.ly/aFg4gr is alleged to be infringing.
someone complains to youtube, which makes it so that http://bit.ly/aFg4gr doesn't work, but still does. -
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Matthew Poole,
I’ll point out that any extradition will not be because of the copyright issue. The Extradition Act 1999, s4(2), does not allow extradition for an offence where the maximum penalty for that offence under NZ law is less than 12 months, and s198(4)(b) of the Copyright Act 1994 provides for a maximum penalty for criminal copyright infringement (being infringement for commercial gain) of three months.
Why would you assume that the charge couldn't be under s 131, with a maximum of 5 years?
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Sacha,
Seizure of assets and shutting down of business operations, though? Shouldn’t that require more proof than “Hollywood said so”?
So, when someone says "those are drugs", the police should wait until after trial before seizing the wads of cash when they raid a drug house? And the drug-sellers should be able to continue selling their drugs until tests are back and confirmed by a court that those were indeed illegal drugs?
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Juha Saarinen,
I’ve been told that it was 76 – seventy-six – police, with the Armed Offenders Squad in support that raided the mansion. All that because of unproven allegations.
Arrests do almost always happen before trials, rather than after them.
-
Hard News: The Mega Conspiracy, in reply to Dylan Reeve,
Millions of dollars of property has been seized by the NZ Police and I can’t imagine the Americans have any claim to it, so who gets it? Perhaps that pays for the operation (and so much more)?
Proceeds of crime.
Or victims who wish to sue? -
We can only presume that our taxes are paying for actions that may carry on for some time yet.
And are guaranteed the same co-operation by other countries, as when, for example, our police were working to get back several million dollars accidentally deposited into someone's bank account.
-
Pilfered from the Facebook page of Fletch and Vaughan, who caption it as:
“BDO 2007 at 1pm vs 2012 BDO at 1pm… WHoasers… Thanks to Brook Miller for the photo comparison!”
