Australia poised to introduce controversial data retention laws
The Australian government has introduced data retention laws that are highly controversial. Under the new provisions, all internet data would be retained for two years, leading to additional expenses related to capturing and storing data that would cost Australian internet users $100 to $200 per year each. The data will be used for copyright enforcement and to track the exact location of mobile phone users.
The Australian Pirate Party is incensed, naturally, and states that this policy destroys any semblance of a free society.
The Australian Pirate Party is incensed, naturally, and states that this policy destroys any semblance of a free society.
"There are far too many flaws in this legislation to enumerate," said Brendan Molloy, President of the Pirate Party. "There has been no discussion as to why the current retention order provisions are insufficient. This legislation is disproportionate and unnecessary. 'Metadata' is ill-defined in such a way as to contain so much information that it is effectively the content of the communication, insofar that it contains the context and location of all communications. This is a massive issue for journalists, whistleblowers, activists, and a whole host of other persons whose activities are in many cases legal but perhaps not in the interests of the state to let happen without some level of harassment.The data retention laws have been delayed in the legal process, but not stopped. Pipedotter Tanuki64 points out "Sooner or later this bill will go through. It is just a matter of time. Same in Germany. A data retention law was rejected several times, but is reintroduced in almost regular intervals. The interests behind these laws are powerful and they have to succeed only once. Once such a law is enacted, it is almost impossible to repeal it again."
"There are significant issues relating to cost and security of the data. Steve Dalby of iiNet said yesterday that iiNet would consider storing the data where it is the cheapest, which includes Chinese cloud providers. There will be a significant 'surveillance tax' introduced by retailers to cover the costs of storing this data that nobody wants stored.
To 2: Easy for them to restrict themselves just to meta data. Sound good in the public... and is 100% sufficient to enforce copyright.
To 3: There is no internet provider, who does not quickly responds to c. p. take down notices. C. p. is the only thing where practically every country agrees on. And how much c. p. is there? I surf the net for more than 30 years and did not stumble upon any. You cannot openly advertize it. You cannot have ads on c. p. sites. To catch c. p. users and producers a much better and totally sufficient way is to follow the cash flow.
Here a good example, what really is significant for certain groups:
http://falkvinge.net/2012/05/23/cynicism-redefined-why-the-copyright-lobby-loves-child-porn/
I'd bet that if we were able to follow most of the lobbying paths for data retention, we would in more than 90% of all case end with the MPAA and RIAA. I all countries.