Comment 2TVE Re: Misleading summary

Story

Australia poised to introduce controversial data retention laws

Preview

Misleading summary (Score: 1)

by axsdenied@pipedot.org on 2014-10-31 12:47 (#2TTJ)

Two things in the summary are misleading:
1. I want to know where $100 to $200 figure came from? It is not in the linked article and, as far as I know, no cost estimates have been released yet.
And it definitely sounds WAY TOO HIGH. Does it mean my Internet bill will go from $50 to $250???

2. "The data will be used for copyright enforcement and to track the exact location of mobile phone users."
This is VERY MISLEADING as it sounds that the main goal is copyright enforcement. The data retention is part of anti-terrorism legislation and it will be used for a variety of investigations (counterterrorism, organised crime, counter-espionage and cyber security). Yes, copyright enforcement also gets mentioned but I don't think it is not the main goal.

Having said that, I completely disagree with the proposed laws as they are more than open for abuse. Even "metadata" has not been defined yet.

And I agree with Tanuki64's comment how such laws are inevitable. The whole world is slowly turning into a police state. Unfortunately resistance is futile :-(

Re: Misleading summary (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2014-11-01 10:28 (#2TVE)

Metadata stored about a phone call could include the parties to the call, location, duration and time of the call, but not what was said.
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/government-shelves-controversial-data-retention-scheme-20130624-2oskq.html
On The Drum tonight: The AFP Commissioner admits data retention laws could be used against illegal downloaders, the Government moves to force a vote on its Direct Action plan and Nova Peris tells Parliament the release of her emails were part of an attempt to blackmail her.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-30/the-drum-thursday-october-30/5855562

Junk Status

Marked as [Not Junk] by bryan@pipedot.org on 2015-01-02 05:34