Australia: Tough New Anti-Piracy Measures

[Aractus]

Are you free to do as you wish with someone else's property?

Look, we don't just let "rights holders" dictate their terms. If we did then they would dictate what you can and cannot do with a product - i.e. use it for it's "intended purpose" only. As an example (in Aust.), a decade back Warner felt they were entitled to print "this disc is not for rental". So the Video Retailer's Assoc. took them on in court and won. They can't say that their discs can't be rented or loaned in libraries. Just like a book publisher can't dictate that. Just like a music publisher can't either.

Sony has tried repeatedly to have modchips banned, and repeatedly they've lost. Time and time again. First they claimed copyright infringement, then they claimed patent infringement, then copyright infringement again. Every time they lost. We don't let "rights holders" dictate to consumers what they can and can't do with their products. If I want to buy a Play Station, gut it, and wear it as a hat that's my prerogative.

We live in a real world with real consequences for actions; not theoretical ones. What benefit does it serve to have rights holders bully, threaten and intimidate consumers? You know when that behaviour happens in a marriage or civil partnership it's called domestic violence. When it happens for political motivations we call it terrorism. When it is done by police it's called "police harassment" or worse "police brutality". In the workplace it's called bullying and harassment. Consumers are the ones who drive the health of the economy; so what possible benefit does it serve to have "rights holders" threaten, intimidate and bully them?