ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”

ihsw wrote: post #4

hack_edu wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that make this less important...? Would you like a timestamp?

It's a repost.

Not to me.

Re: ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”

#7

Post by westicle » Mon, Dec 31, 2012, 2:18 AM UTC

ihsw wrote: post #4

hack_edu wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that make this less important...? Would you like a timestamp?

It's a repost.

Humour those of us who were busy doing Christmas-related things and missed this one. I found it interesting.

I expect the next move from those beholden to the major studios will be to lobby for tougher legislation - SOPA-style. It is important to maintain awareness and vigilance so that all efforts can be made to stymie such legislation.

Re: ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”

#8

Post by samuellevy » Mon, Dec 31, 2012, 3:08 AM UTC

westicle wrote: post #7

ihsw wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a repost.

Humour those of us who were busy doing Christmas-related things and missed this one. I found it interesting. I expect the next move from those beholden to the major studios will be to lobby for tougher legislation - SOPA-style. It is important to maintain awareness and vigilance so that all efforts can be made to stymie such legislation.

The Communication minister (Stephen Conroy) is, apart from a horrible "filter the naughty stuff off the internet" plan which has since gone away, pretty switched on about tech.

Although he has been critical of iinet in the past, be's also said that he's not going to push new laws into place unless both sides agree on them.

Re: ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”

#9

Post by joshka » Mon, Dec 31, 2012, 8:04 AM UTC

Original blog post by iinet: http://blog.iinet.net.au/iinet-withdraws-notice-notice-schem...

Re: ISP Walks Out of Piracy Talks: “We’re Not The Internet Police”

#10

Post by mattvot » Mon, Dec 31, 2012, 8:56 AM UTC

hack_edu wrote: post #3

mattvot wrote: post #2

From the 17th Dec

Does that make this less important...? Would you like a timestamp?

Not at all.

When I saw the title it was familiar. So I posted the date for other HN users that recognise it and can relate that they too have seen the article before.

I do wish that you would take the comment as it is, a date. It is in no way a smug snark at old news.