Public Address - Hard News (Home)

Down in the Park? | Dec 11, 2006 09:47

It appears that Carlaw Park stadium ain't dead yet. There's a BOOT proposal pending from private interests. I still have my doubts about available space, especially for egress, but the idea of spending $400 million on Eden Park is such a stinker that I'm very happy to listen to the arguments.

But this bit doesn't impress me:

Mr Parrant says they already have the drawings of what would be a 40 thousand seat stadium, with 20 thousand removable seats.

So the permanent stadium would be smaller than Eden Park? Think again, chaps. That doesn't make much sense.

So New Zealand would lose the entire tournament if the government banned Fiji from playing in the Wellington sevens? Really? Could we hear that from the IRB itself?

That TVNZ general manager of commissioning and production Tony Holden has a huge chip on his shoulder about independent production companies isn't news to anyone with any awareness of the industry. But you'd think he'd be able to keep a lid on it at the Spada dinner. Apparently, he couldn't.

Paul Krugman's They Told You So is a good read.

Who knew? The first time the Velvet Underground tried to present a debut album to a record company, the record started not with the tinkly tune of 'Sunday Morning', but the dissonant 'European Son'. Not surprisingly, the company, Columbia, rejected the album. The original acetate - one of two in existence - turned up in a flea market in 2002. It has just sold for $155,401 at auction.

PS: Best get your entry in for our Flying Nun Moments competition, because I'll declare a winner some time this week. That winner gets a copy of the limited edition Flying Nun anniversary 4CD box set, valued at $150, and we'll chuck around a few Little Brother t-shirts too.

(20 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Copywrong | Dec 08, 2006 10:53

There are some things to applaud in the Copyright (New Technologies and Performers' Rights) Amendment Bill. It finally brings to the table an exception for the format-shifting of music that was proposed more than five years ago, it promises to expand and flesh out the concept of "fair dealing" with copyright material, and it tidies up a silly situation where transient copying by ISPs in the course of delivering your dataz was a breach of the Copyright Act.

And then there's the bad stuff. Specifically, "anti-circumvention" provisions that emulate America's Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to the point of applying criminal penalties to actions that have previously been considered no business of our Copyright Act.

At a guess, the anti-circumvention provisions are there as a quid pro quo for format shifting, which has been strongly opposed (even though everyone does it) by the music industry. The strange thing is that those provisions apply in circumstances that were specifically ruled out at an earlier stage of policy development. And format shifting - which was a key feature of proposed amendments from the very beginning - is to be subject to a two-year sunset clause. Unless they are actively renewed, your rights to rip to your iPod will automatically expire.

No, it's not the kind of crazy-assed copyright law the Australians are in the process of passing, but we shouldn't ever use Australia's laws on digital media as a benchmark, because their legislators have repeatedly passed bad laws. We have been - and ought to be - a bit better than them.

Anyway, the story is neatly laid out on the MED website here.

The thread can be picked up from the 2001 MED discussion paper, Digital Technology and the Copyright Act 1994, which proposed an exception for the format-shifting of legitimately-purchased music, to end the unsatisfactory situation where conventional uses of music - say, making a tape to listen to on your car stereo - were a breach of the Copyright Act.

The led to the 2002 Position Paper, which fleshed out the ideas of the previous document. What it says about MED lawyers' view on the status of Technological Protection Measures (TPMs) is worth quoting:

106. The Ministry's preferred policy response is that section 226 retain its focus on copy control measures, and not provide legislative protection against the circumvention of TPMs which only control access. That is, for section 226 to apply, the TPM circumvented must prevent copying, and the circumvention must be for the purpose of copying or the infringement of other restricted acts of the copyright owner in the Act (including potentially a new technology-neutral right of communication).

107. In proposing this policy response, the Ministry intends, for example, that the supply and use of devices that allow the circumvention of regional zone access protection (to allow the playing of legitimately purchased DVD movies or games etc. from other zones), would not infringe the TPM provisions. If, however, a circumvention device directly facilitated the infringement of copyright, that would be a breach of section 226. The Ministry also seeks to avoid, in New Zealand, situations where a court may find that devices such as DVD players or PlayStation consoles constitute TPMs (with copy control) by virtue of the fact that a small amount of data may be temporarily stored or reproduced in the device's RAM (see also Part Two of this paper on transient copying exception). 37

It is the Ministry's view that it is not the role of the Act to protect access control technology, which is used in some cases to price discriminate and control geographical distribution of works, to the detriment of New Zealand users.

Store that last paragraph in memory, because its sentiments begun to disappear from this point. Here's the paper on the proposed amendments, from June 2003:

Prohibit the supply or manufacture of devices, means or information that circumvent technological protection measures, where circumvention could enable infringement of any of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, and provide criminal penalties for large scale commercial dealing in circumvention devices, means or information;

And the Cabinet paper of the same year:

…agree to amend the provision relating to technological protection measures … so that the prohibition against the making, importing, hiring and selling of devices, services or information designed to circumvent "copy protection" be expanded to cover devices, services or information that circumvent technological protection measures that protect all rights provided to copyright owners, including communication, not just copying; and to facilitate the actual exercise of permitted acts where technological measures have been applied …

Two different aims in one paragraph: to bring criminal penalties to bear on the supply of devices or information designed to circumvent all TPMs, and not just those relating to copying and distribution - and to "facilitate" such circumvention where it is for the purposes of a "permitted" act.

And now, the draft bill:

" … amend the provision relating to technological protection measures--- so that the prohibition against the making, importing, hiring, and selling of devices, services, or information designed to circumvent "copy protection" be expanded to cover devices, services, or information that circumvent technological protection measures that protect all rights provided to copyright owners (including communication, not just copying)"

And ...

"introduce an offence (carrying a sentence of a fine not exceeding $150,000 or a term of imprisonment of up to 5 years, or both) for commercial dealing in devices, services, or information designed to circumvent technological protection measures:"

So does the format-shifting provision mean the law will help us remove DRM on music files so we can play them on a different device? Or was I potentially in breach as the publisher this week of a discussion thread that contained advice on removing DRM from music files? Not clear.

The bill specifically (if vaguely) exempts one category of device that would seem to fall afoul of the intent of the new provisions: region-free DVD players.

Weighing in with significant penalties for circumvention like this raises some problems. One is that this it expands the scope of copyright law, even though, as A.J. Park pointed out, "a law which makes defeating technical protection of a copyright work illegal is not really copyright law at all. Nevertheless because it is for the benefit of copyright owners, it has been included in copyright legislation and has been referred to as 'paracopyright'."

The purpose of copyright law is not, as is often supposed, to serve the interests of copyright owners but to serve the public interest by offering enough protection to creators that they will be minded to continue to create new works. But the proposed amendments potentially place the force of the law behind business models that may be hostile to the public interest.

Apple Computer's product lock-in (iTunes Store-purchased files only play in iTunes or on iPods, and they can be difficult to move around) doesn't present a practical problem for me at the moment: I like my iPod. But what say things change? What say I'm faced with purchasing that music all over again because the format in which I purchased it is obsolete? This isn't just theoretical: it's exactly what Microsoft has just done with the Zune player, which won't play the (ahem) Plays For Sure files Microsoft was selling from MSN Music right up until the Zune's launch on November 14. If customers want to play the music they paid money for on the Zune, they'll have to pay again. Is it really the job of the statutes to protect that sort of behaviour?

There are various other reasons to doubt the wisdom of putting this stuff in copyright law, as detailed by Cory Doctorow's comments on the New Zealand bill, Ben Gracewood's blog post and the EFF's unintended consequences of the DMCA page.

Then there's the libraries' view:

… such technological measures do not distinguish between uses which are not authorised by the copyright owner but are permitted by law, on the one hand, and those uses which are not authorised by the owner and also infringing. For example, the same copy-control mechanism, which prevents a person from making infringing copies of a copyright work, may also prevent a student or a visually impaired person from making legitimate fair use/fair dealing copies.

---

Anyway, quick comment on the iTunes Store: it's a bit of a mess. Buying music is easy, finding it rather less so. Try clicking the "Quick Link" marked "browse" on the home page, or any other page. WTF?

I still haven't worked out a way to browse, say all the available rock releases, as opposed to just the ones iTunes is directing my attention to. The page from the "Local Sounds" link or banner only contains one album, by Frontline. But if you scroll down the home page, you see a whole lot more in "Just Added - New Zealand".

Using eMusic as a point of comparison, iTunes seems surprisingly clunky and not as much fun. I've bought several things (that exclusive Flaming Lips EP was hard to refuse) but I don't think I'll be giving up my eMusic sub.

And where are those two million songs?

--

Finally, Michael Bassett's latest "newspaper column" did not appear in an actual newspaper, only on his website. Has the Dom Post given him the boot? (Update: It appeared in The Press, as did a response from Nicky Hager.)

Like, seemingly, everyone who claims to be rebutting Nicky Hager's The Hollow Men, Bassett basically ignores the substance of the book. Bassett simply contrives to be more odious and abusive than everyone else. He basically calls the editors of the Dom Post idiots and implies that TV3 has been dishonest in its presentation of the facts. He slings off at the "hacks" so "easily beguiled" by Hager, who he compares not only to David Irving but to - get this - Stalin. He pretends his own conflict of interest - that he posed as an independent commentator on matters in which he was directly involved - doesn't exist.

Can this really be the same commentator who railed against the shooting of messengers in the Benson Pope case? For whom the "prima facie" appearance of having lied was enough? (And if you don't think National point-blank lied on a number of issues last year, you haven't actually read the book. I may differ with the author on some of his analysis, but the degree of deception is well enough demonstrated to anyone who can read English.)

Really, what a dreadful man Bassett is.

(88 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Remember where you heard it first ... | Dec 06, 2006 07:53

Righto. The New Zealand iTunes Store is now available as an option in the iTunes app. I had to fiddle about a bit to see it - see advice in the discussion thread for this post - suggesting there's a cacheing issue or something, but it's there, if a bit threadbare as yet.

Also there is the new Apple New Zealand website , incorporating - yes! - an Apple Store. Those new price points look pretty tasty, and I'm quite impressed that the New Zealand Apple Store has picked up my existing Apple ID, with purchase history and all - and that the same existing ID works for the iTunes Store. That makes things easy.

Update: Just bought 'Go (2006)' by Moby, for $1.79, which is 20 cents cheaper than the price everyone was anticipating - and 20 cents cheaper than Vodafone.

And ... In keeping with the rock 'n' roll theme for the day, I'm further delighted to announce our Flying Nun Moments competition. The contributor of the piece of writing - long, short, haiku, whatever - that most takes our fancy will win a copy of the limited-edition 4CD Flying Nun box set (retail value $150), and we'll toss around some tasty Little Brother t-shirts to the runners-up too. Because we're like that.

We also have a special guest post coming on the Flying Nun tip ....

(134 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Doing the Rounds | Dec 05, 2006 11:30

Fresh FM's Matt Lawrey asked John Key a good question last week: "In 1981, were you for or against the Springbok Tour?" It's a good question because it explores a fundamental divide in New Zealand society. You couldn't be older than 12 at the time and not have an opinion on it.

But Key's answer is insipid: he claims at first not to remember what he thought at the time, then says he doesn't have "a strong feeling of it at the time - it's such a long time ago", then eventually "guesses" that he was probably in favour. Listening to it (and it's worth listening to the whole thing), the impression is that he's unsure what he should say.

The interview moves on to why he voted against the civil unions legislation and again he gives vague, even contradictory answers. He doesn't care "whether people are gay or lesbian," but thought the government was being dishonest and ought to have said its aim was really gay marriage. So he's in favour of gay marriage? No, he's "not entirely sure whether gay and lesbian people should be able to get married."

You also get the impression that the new National leader is striving to say the right thing in another broadcast interview, with the Christian TV channel Shine TV. "I live my life by Christian principles," he offers hopefully at one point.

Key doesn't seem able to articulate a strong political philosophy, even to back up his stated beliefs. It seems unlikely he'll develop one now, and it may even be that he doesn't need to.

But I do feel bound to make the comparison with Colin James' interview with his deputy, Bill English, for the Weekend Herald. English uses the interview to clearly mark out his philosophy and beliefs, his religious faith included. It's quite crisp.

Speaking of belief, Jesus Camp is currently sitting on Google Video, in its entirety. I got off the torrent a couple of weeks ago, and I was actually surprised at my reaction to it. The first time Becky Fischer started fanning hysteria in her infant flock, I felt so upset that I had to pause the video and go and get some fresh air. (Update: The clip has been removed.)

Oh, and it's iTunes a-go-go tomorrow. Unless they have a glitch and it's Thursday. Or, I guess, something really fscks up and the date fall back to Christmas ...

(63 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!

Aggregate me, baby! | Dec 01, 2006 10:46

Do we have a little bit of a situation here? A senior employee from iTunes in the US has been here this week - not that there's anything happening, you understand - to talk with potential aggregators for New Zealand content on the iTunes store due to launch next week. And at least two companies - Loop Digital and Jiggy.co.nz - are pitching for the business.

The idea is that iTunes doesn't want to be dealing with every little label or garage band, and some of them probably don't want to be dealing with iTunes either. So a third party comes in, aggregates the small fry, deals with iTunes, and clips the ticket.

Wellington-based Loop has a track record with iTunes in several territories, including the US and UK, and on Wednesday signed an extension to its existing territories, to encompass New Zealand. It has been approaching local labels this week with a fairly straightforward offer to place their content and branding on any iTunes store in the world, for a 20% commission on receipts. The standard contract term is 120 days. In, probably, all good faith, Loop is claiming to be the only local aggregator for iTunes.

But Jiggy.co.nz, which has hitherto been delivering internet digital downloads by means of billing to mobile phones, yesterday issued a press release in which director Dave Gibbons declared that, having met with the iTunes rep on Wednesday, he was "looking for 40 New Zealand acts to submit their albums for the iTunes New Zealand store when it opens." Jiggy also aggregates for a larger aggregator, The Orchard.

So there would seem to be something of a race on. Perhaps there'll be room for two. The interesting thing is that there is plenty of potential for the local indie labels to offer artists a much better deal on digital distribution than the major music companies, because what the majors offer is so bad.

Meanwhile, the impression grows that Telecom has somehow screwed up the launch of its new "unleashed" broadband deals. NZBC's Chris Bell reports frequent micro-outages this week, and no joy in diagnosing the problem, let alone getting it fixed. PC World's PressF1 has a lengthy discussion thread.

Meanwhile, PA reader Janet Digby reports that Telecom is now trying to switch people back from the new accounts it is marketing:

You are probably aware of this, but there some Xtra customers are experiencing major delays with mail sent through Xtra.

Some mails were delayed up to 8 hours yesterday and some are yet to arrive.

While all this was happening I had an odd call from Xtra asking whether I would like to change plans - from Go Large to one with a data cap. The person calling seemed unable to answer even basic questions including why I would change to a plan with a data cap - except to say that there was less 'interference' with the plan she was suggesting. When I commented that all plans were supposed to be max speed she seemed confused regarding her mission.

Perhaps they are trying to encourage customers to pull back as their system can't handle the additional traffic resulting from their new plans.

Customer service acknowledge they are having problems (I understand some people can't get on to their broadband connection too) I asked why these issues weren't listed on their website and he didn't know.

To top it all off - their phone system is on the blink and the opening recording tells you that you might get cut off - which I did, twice!

Hmmm. I'd been wondering if it was time to switch away from my 2Mbit/s Wired Country connection. Clearly, it is not …

Elsewhere …

The Fundy Post lists the reasons why members of the Exclusive Brethren should not send emails. (I'm taking a break from this sort of thing today, but I'll have some more on Maxim's shonky NZVotes project next week.)

NotPC explores the "Many Worlds" interpretation of quantum physics.

DubDotDash covers the RDU controversy (look out for "Real RDU" link in the comments - it's very funny).

And Syd Barrett's things are being auctioned off.

(38 responses)
Digg this Scoopit!