• Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • News, Telecommunications - Written by on Tuesday, January 17, 2012 11:45 - 29 Comments

    Govt censors secret anti-piracy meeting notes

    news Citing the “public interest”, the Federal Attorney-General’s Department has censored from documents released under Freedom of Information laws eight pages of notes taken by one of its staff members at a secret industry meeting held in September last year to address the issue of Internet piracy, after initially stating that no minutes were taken of the meeting.

    The meeting, held on 23 September, saw major Australian ISPs sit down with the representatives of the film, television and music industries with the aim of discussing a potential industry resolution to the issue of online copyright infringement. A number of the nation’s top telcos, including Telstra and Optusattended the meeting, although the the majority of the organisations who attended were from content industry organisations, including the Asia-Pacific branch of the Motion Picture Association and the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft.

    In October, the Attorney-General’s Department denied a Freedom of Information request for the minutes of the meeting, stating that no such document existed. However, in FoI documents released to the Australian Pirate Party late last year, the Department revealed that eight pages of hand-written notes had in fact been taken at the meeting by one of its officers. However, those eight pages were deleted from a comprehensive swathe of documents released about the meeting as part of the Freedom of Information request.

    “The following eight pages, including this one, are handwritten notes taken by an office of the Attorney-General’s Department of the 23 September 2011 meeting,” the FoI document states. “These notes are exempt pursuant to s47C.”

    In a statement, the Pirate Party said it failed to understand why the Attorney-General’s Department felt it necessary to initially claim no minutes were taken of the meeting. According to Section 47C of the Act cited by the Department when censoring the notes, access to information must generally be given unless it would be contrary to the public interest. “How on earth is a meeting discussing possible regulatory regimes for file-sharing on the Internet ‘not in the public interest’ to know about?” said Simon Frew, Deputy President of Pirate Party Australia.

    “There has been an array of draconian laws passed in other countries. In France they have the notorious HADOPI legislation which disconnects people after three accusations of illicit sharing, and in the United States the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) – which are currently in their Congress – aim to enforce a censorship regime against sites that could facilitate file-sharing. It is vital that we avoid the introduction of such onerous laws here. All we know is a meeting took place behind closed doors, excluding all consumer representatives and with blacked out ‘notes.’”

    “It smells a little fishy to say the least,” he concluded.

    In other FoI documents, the Department also revealed that it denied requests by consumer organisations to attend the meeting. “Consumer representatives were not invited to the upcoming meeting as it will be an initial meeting to assess the industry’s progress toward a solution,” the documents stated. “This was not an oversight.”

    Since the meeting was held, Australia has had a change of Attorney-General, with former Health Minister Nicola Roxon taking the reins from incumbent Robert McClellend. Roxon has not yet indicated what her stance on online copyright infringement might be.

    The September briefing also discussed solutions in other countries, but the FoI documents also revealed that the Attorney-General’s Department hoped to frame the discussion on the day through the lens of the so-called “six strikes” policy to tackling online copyright infringement agreed between the content and ISP industries in the US this year.

    Under the deal, major US ISPs — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Cablevision, and Time Warner Cable agreed with the film and music industries to forward copyright infringement notices from content owners to alleged Internet pirates. After five or six of these notices, ISPs have agreed to institute certain punitive measures, including, for example, temporary reductions in Internet speeds, redirections to educational pages and pages to discuss the problem. A copy of the US memorandum of understanding, as well as briefings about how other jurisdictions handle the issue, was circulated in detail to participants before the meeting.

    submit to reddit

    29 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. AJ
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink |

      Give people a way to pay for content and they will.

      The government should legislate that any content not provided for purchase in a country in a reasonable period of time for people to access should be fair game people want to purchase or rent and watch content but can’t so they download.

      I would pay up to $150 a month to access everything I want when I want through my smart tv or ps3 or xbox yet I can’t.

      Yet these people who dont want my money want to be able to screw everyone because someone downloaded something they could not get elsewhere gee brilliant the world has moved on embrace it guys digital distrubution gives you MORE freedom MORE profit Yet you want to sue people instead of making money

      • Adam
        Posted 17/01/2012 at 1:19 pm | Permalink |

        That precisely is what astounds me about this whole thing. The government appears to be helping an entire industry that refuses to help itself.

        • Chrisr
          Posted 17/01/2012 at 1:46 pm | Permalink |

          So true, we have nothing like Netflix, so people will download if they can not buy the content.

        • Posted 18/01/2012 at 4:06 pm | Permalink |

          Not only that but it is an industry that contributes less than 0.5% (yes zero point five) to Australia’s GDP. That figure includes both direct and indirect contribution and is based on AFACT et.al own figures and reports.

    2. Daniel Myles
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 12:52 pm | Permalink |

      Typical and consistant with the current government’s attitude towards any restriction and locking down of internet access within Australia.

      We all saw Conroy’s antics with the filter, we are now seeing the AG’s department mimicing that deceitful and secretive way of implementing dodgy legislation. The government desperately wants to control all things internet but wants to do it without costing votes and creating publicity.

      Good on you Renai for exposing this, I only wish mainstream media would also give it due attention.

      • Posted 17/01/2012 at 7:40 pm | Permalink |

        No worries! I will keep investigating this area, I know a lot of readers are interested in it.

        I have been quite concerned about the Attorney-General’s Department for some time. The OzLog proposal and now this proposal … AGD seems to have quite the penchant for secretive monitoring and control of the Internet. I may need to break out the FoI stick a few more times before this is over.

        • Cameron Watt
          Posted 17/01/2012 at 10:57 pm | Permalink |

          Don’t forget the Wikileaks / fisherman / ASIO amendments.

    3. Pepi
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 1:30 pm | Permalink |

      The fact that the meeting was shrouded in such intense secrecy suggests that it went far beyond the limited area of copyright infringement, and that ‘copyright’ is just an excuse to get the foot in the door.

      My guess is that the missing eight pages comprises a summary of the types of websites which our government would like to block, because they contradict the official line. A lot of those sites reveal some inconvenient truths about very controversial events, which are otherwise withheld from the public by the propaganda apparatus known as the ‘mass media’.

      Given that the Gillard government is champing at the bit to reign a bit of well-deserved criticism in the newspapers, how much more paranoid must it be over that last source of uncensored information known as ‘the Internet’?!

      I hate to say it, but the days of Internet freedom appear numbered.

      • Jason
        Posted 17/01/2012 at 2:42 pm | Permalink |

        Pepi

        they were since the howard government went to bed with the usa

    4. Posted 17/01/2012 at 3:19 pm | Permalink |

      as i wrote below:

      http://delimiter.com.au/2011/02/24/why-are-media-giants-so-afraid-of-technology/

      if given the chance to legally purchase content at a reasonable price, a LOT of piracy will dry up.

      • Adam
        Posted 17/01/2012 at 4:37 pm | Permalink |

        My view is this: they don’t *really* care about piracy, they just want to drag their antiquated business models and supply chains into the future. They became bloated by creating scarcity and relying on physical distribution, they’re becoming redundant very quickly, and now they’re scaring governments worldwide into protecting them from what consumers want.

    5. Goddy
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 3:37 pm | Permalink |

      This level of sececy and slithering around is exactly the way these laws need to be implemented, because they know there is no chance in hell they would go over well with the electorate.

    6. Zwan
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink |

      Its just a facade; they were actually talking about caching vast quantities of nuclear weapons on Australian shores. *rolling eyes*

    7. Jason
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 5:34 pm | Permalink |

      It’s a concern when the public aren’t really interested in such a story, all Government material should be publically available even without the use of FOI. Officials are elected by the people, for the people! not individual corporations but perhaps the well to do politicians forgot this part.

      If only changes to our political system could be made as we are stuck in an endless loop with two parties in Australia and the most insane part of it all is they get to decide who our prime minister is.

      Political donations to both individuals and parties need to be publicised and a cap set as it’s hard to believe the attention corporations get in this country without money exchanging hands at a political level.

    8. Simon Shaw
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 7:46 pm | Permalink |

      Simple. Charge a bandwidth tax to home consumers. 0-10GB a month- No tax. 10-20 $5 and so on.
      Give the money to the entertainment industry then let us download whatever we want.

      Everyone benefits.

      • shintemaster
        Posted 18/01/2012 at 8:35 am | Permalink |

        Not exactly. Why should millions of people subsidise an entire industry just because they have deep pockets. The jobs involved are predominantly overseas as well so we can’t even argue we’re supporting local industry.

      • Posted 18/01/2012 at 9:57 pm | Permalink |

        That would be a huge win for the content industry and no one else. What about people who consume 50 – 100GB a month from legitimately free websites like iView, Youtube, daily motion etc?
        Why should they line the pockets of corporations so that other people can download movies for free?

        As others have said, make the content available at a reasonable cost and stop treating customers like criminals and the majority of people will hand over their hard earned cash without a second thought.

      • Cameron Watt
        Posted 18/01/2012 at 10:27 pm | Permalink |

        Why stop there? Why not tax everyone an extra %5 of their salary and give that to Hollywood?

        Your proposal is about as sensible as when it was proposed to add an excise to every blank CD/DVD sold, even if you were using the media to back up your own content.

        • Pepi
          Posted 19/01/2012 at 10:07 am | Permalink |

          Because it’s not really about Hollywood at all! That’s only to get the foot in the door to something far more oppressive, which is the ability to shut down any and every website which may contain something that our esteemed rulers would prefer we didn’t know. And believe me, that covers a huge range of topics on a huge number of websites, far beyond the limited boundaries of A/V copyright.

          Our entire freedom to communicate and learn the truth about almost anything is under threat – people need to WAKE UP and look at the big picture!

    9. bdc
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 8:01 pm | Permalink |

      Hmm, any chance the pirate party might look at taking them to court for access to the documents, I would certainly donate to such an initiative…even if all that was raised was enough to file papers etc it would be good because the news would grab hold of it and the gov might just give in.

    10. eddy
      Posted 17/01/2012 at 11:06 pm | Permalink |

      Some of the released documents are here.

      http://ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/FreedomofInformation_DocumentsreleasedunderFOI_FOIRequest-ApplicationforcopiesofdocumentsregardingthemeetingconveyedbyAGDbetweenInternetServiceProvidersandspecialinterestgroupsrelatingtoonlinecopyrightinfringement

      OR
      Freedom of information disclosure log
      http://ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/FreedomofInformation_Freedomofinformationdisclosurelog

    11. Duke
      Posted 18/01/2012 at 5:04 am | Permalink |

      Hopefully the imminent demolition of the SOPA farce will give even the sheep in our current regime reason to consider why the US is currently seeing a massive backlash against the assault on the fundamentals of the internet by stupid, greedy and corrupt vested interests. If their masters in Washington are doing a double take despite the infantile bleatings of the senile twittering golem himself, it may be time that the AG and her minions grew a pair and told AFACT and co. to go suck a lemon… those wacky libertarians the Swiss have done so and the Swedes despite their weird legal system of wack a mole by amateurs and lobbyists have declared file sharing to be a legitimate religion. Clowns to the left of us, jokers to the right, whats a poor boy to do?

    12. George
      Posted 18/01/2012 at 7:42 pm | Permalink |

      “Officials are elected by the people, for the people! not individual corporations ”

      Jason, in theory you are right but in practice most politicians only serve corporations, the powerful and the filthy rich. Most governments in the world pretend to serve the people but in reality they mainly serve the powerful interests. Governments of any political persuasion aren’t our friends and should never be trusted.

    13. David
      Posted 22/01/2012 at 7:13 am | Permalink |

      Sorry to be meta, but I want to start by saying that you can tell that Delimiter is unique among news sourcesby seeing that almost all the comments have well thought out, reasoned positions, and I can read the comments without worrying about the future of humanity.

      Now, I’d just like to point out that the government’s behaviour around this is not limited to Labor. If Liberal were on power, it would be the same. It’s about old, secretive politics that knows that shedding light on how things work will reveal corruption that the public won’t condone.

      There’s a reason that these FOI request stories usually have the Pirate Party mentioned: it’s because it’s the only political organisation that is really trying to shine a light into inconvenient places.

    14. looktall
      Posted 22/01/2012 at 12:00 pm | Permalink |

      Sorry to be meta, but I want to start by saying that you can tell that Delimiter is unique among news sourcesby seeing that almost all the comments have well thought out, reasoned positions, and I can read the comments without worrying about the future of humanity.

      you’ve obviously never gone into an NBN thread on here then. :)

    15. Concerned
      Posted 26/01/2012 at 2:34 pm | Permalink |

      Renai,

      Is there a Commonwealth Ombudsman that FoI denials and redactions can be appealed to? Here in SA you can do that. A Greens MLC lodged a request for correspondence between the Planning Minister and developers regarding a controversial rezoning and was denied, but appealed to the Ombudsman and won. (He was then subsequently sued by the developers to keep the contents secret!)

      On the face of it, this collusion and secrecy, much like the links between the development lobby and SA ALP government, has the fetid stench of corruption about it. But then considering how the ALP danced to the tune of the publishing industry by banning parallel importation of books I guess we shouldn’t be surprised.

      • Posted 26/01/2012 at 3:47 pm | Permalink |

        Yes, you can apply to the federal Office of the Information Commissioner. It’s usually not worth it, but I may look into that further.

    16. Posted 10/04/2013 at 1:57 pm | Permalink |

      I leave a response whenever I appreciate a post on a site or if I
      have something to contribute to the discussion. It is triggered by the fire displayed in the post I
      read. And on this article Govt censors secret anti-piracy meeting notes | Delimiter.
      I was actually excited enough to leave a thought :-) I do have a few questions for you if it’s allright. Could it be simply me or do a few of these comments come across like written by brain dead visitors? :-P And, if you are writing on additional sites, I would like to keep up with anything fresh you have to post. Could you make a list the complete urls of all your social pages like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications


    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry


    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights