SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Australian Communications Minister is proposing "game changing" laws crack down on Piracy by forcing search engines such as Google to filter content results thereby removing the path people have to finding illegal content online.
[...] Under the proposed laws to be introduced to Parliament today, authorities will also be able to force search engines like Google to stop "unashamedly facilitating crime" by promoting pirate sites that allow internet users to illegally download music or films.
Graham Burke, chief executive of Australian film company Village Roadshow, last night hailed the new laws as game-changing for the industry while slamming Google for acting "as evil as Big Tobacco" in its online behaviour.
"We stand ready to be co-operative with Google. We see good Google and bad Google. But bad Google is as evil as Big Tobacco was 30 years ago. They know what they're doing. They know they're facilitating and enabling crime and it's time for them to clean their act up," he told News Corp.
He accused Google of "unashamedly facilitating crime" by taking people to criminal pirate websites.
Does the Australian government really need to give weapons to special interest groups to enforce civil laws the majority of people do not support?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @03:05PM (2 children)
Huh? I don't take "steal" anything, and I certainly don't do business with any government agencies, so I am not on the receiving end of anyone's "taxes" (though I pay them a lot of my own).
Nice straw man you've got there, trying to equate me earning a living with depriving people of safety. I am not responsible for the poor performance of those in Congress. They rarely - if ever - vote my interests. And if enough funding is not being provided to fight violent crime then more money should be allocated. Let's cut back on the corporate welfare and fund things that actually help the people who live in our country.
There is more than one or two agencies "fighting crime", and each agency can certainly do more than one thing at a time. Also, just because things like fraud, money laundering, etc aren't violent crimes doesn't mean they should be ignored because it's funding that could go towards violent crime. There should be enough funding for all crime.
Nothing is "given" to me - not by you, not by the government and not by the world. I work hard, and have worked decades at improving my skills and my craft. Being in business, and selling my "product", doesn't take anything away from anyone. Any person or company that wants my "product" should pay for it, just as I am expected to pay for things I want/need/use/consume/whatever.
I'm doing something "harmful" because you don't want to pay for a product or service? All of this blather sure sounds like you think the world owes you everything and anyone who works or betters themselves make you look bad.
Still, you've said nothing addressing the basic question of why people or companies who want my "product" shouldn't pay for it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @06:39PM (1 child)
Whether they should pay for your data or not is subjective. However, what is inconceivable to me is this idea that the government should prevent people from sharing certain data simply so some people can make more money and so maybe we'll see an increase in the amount of data deemed to be valuable. The ends don't justify the means.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 19 2018, @07:57PM
Isn't that how capitalism works?
Since you brought up data, is it OK for companies to share your data without your consent and without you being compensated?