Blog Archive

About Me

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

postheadericon NZ Copyright Tribunal: Accusations Are Presumed Infringement, Despite Denials

Few weeks ago, we noticed that the first "three strikes" offenses of New Zealand was established to address the Copyright Tribunal (a previous case was abandoned after industry disk (RIANZ) realized he kiss). The Court issued its first decision, requiring the defendant to pay a total of NZ $ 616.57 (about $ 515 U.S.). The person who was accused of downloading and sharing of Rihanna Man Down twice, and Hot Chelle Rae

Tonight Tonight time. The court noted that the first song to sell $ 2.39 and $ 1.79 in the second, so that doubled the first time, and started $ 6.57 (all NZ $). He added $ 50 to pay for notices of violation sent. Another $ 200 covers the cost paid RIANZ take the case, and then inserted into a "deterrent value" of $ 360 - or $ 120 per song. Add it all up and you get $ 616.57.
The full judgment is a little strange, but it highlights the ridiculous three strikes law NZ. The Court notes that, since this rule applies this principle, explain carefully all the points, and he did. But what is really funny is that notes that, under the law,

you basically have to assume that the allegations relate to the guilt

. The defendant responded by admitting that to download

Man Down

once, and I think the second was a problem with uTorrent. She denies it completely or family member of another song downloaded.
"The letter describes three distinct offenses recorded over an Internet connection in my name. The first song was downloaded a song by Rihanna called man. Accept responsibility for it. I download this song without knowing that by doing this site is illegal when this issue has been downloaded on my computer. entire program utorrent download on my computer [W] hen I turned on my computer said that the song was still unloading and perhaps the origin of the song recorded twice what you download? know if this is possible or not, but do not know why it shows that I would try download the same song twice.
continued to get a pop-up notification appears stating that uTorrent is already running but is not responding, Please close all uTorrent processes and try again ... I realized how clearly the song was still trying to download, but still could not find a way to erase the entire program to recently when someone you see as having received the letter, I guess this program in my computer was causing the warning on the download
When I received the letter warning me of the discharge and the consequences, and that it was illegal, was not opposed to the letter when I took responsibility for my actions and I realized that I ' was wrong and as a warning not to do it again. I never intentionally do something illegal and you can see my record because it is clean. I didn 't realize it was illegal and I hope sincerely apologize for this error and I removed from my computer.


tonight Regarding tonight Hot Chelle Rae song is downloading, I can not accept responsibility for what has not been done by me or anyone in this house, but if I find the person responsible discharge through my internet so I will apply the consequences behind it. "

So basically, three strikes, admits one, indicates that the other, if is made, was completely accident, and vehemently refuses to final discharge. The Court basically ignored this and said that, by law, an accusation is as good as guilty unless
provide evidence of innocence

- can not say what. Think about it for a second. You must prove a negative here - it seems almost impossible, but it is what the law apparently requires.




The law creates a presumption that each incidence of file sharing identified in the notice of violation is a violation the right of the owner of copyright in the work identified. The account holder can provide evidence that this presumption does not apply, or give reasons why it should not apply. In this case, the defendant has not presented evidence that the presumption does not apply. In fact, recognizes at least some kind of violation has occurred and apologized for it.
One might think that downloading just honestly admit that the Court might wonder if perhaps the other two charges were inaccurate, but rather take it as a proof that " a kind of "violation has occurred, we may assume that the charges were all accurate. Court rejects fundamentally hands and says there is "sufficient evidence" means only "guilty."

Find best price for : --BitTorrent----utorrent----RIANZ----Tribunal----Copyright--

0 comments: