US Offered To Draft NZ 3-Strikes Law, Fund Copyright Initiative

An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks has just posted hundreds of cables from US personnel in New Zealand that reveal regular government lobbying on copyright, offers to draft New Zealand three-strikes-and-you're-out legislation, and a recommendation to spend over NZ$500,000 to fund a recording industry-backed IP enforcement initiative. The funding raises the question of whether New Zealand is aware that local enforcement initiatives, including raids and court cases, have been funded by the US government."

I'm from New Zealand

[lul_wat]

We recently had a 3-strikes law rushed through parliment by the current government (which is a gross mis-use of power).

I'd like to share this video which demonstrates the level of understanding our MP's have

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJdPkrpFXBM [youtube.com]

Re:I'm outraged!

[f16c]

Corporations are NOT people.Corporations may be made up of people acting in concert but are a legal construct and should be treated that way with legal rights limitations. Corporate bullshit seems may be running the country only because the nobody pays attention to this stuff which is broadcast here but mostly ignored by TV (corporate sponsored) news outlets. Our ignorance is gonna kill us.

Re:This is the second way America tries to invade

[Anonymous Coward]

It's amazing, really. Not only did they insist that the NZ government keep ACTA a secret [keionline.org] from its people (all attendee's people, actually)

But they stepped in to assist in re-drafting the bill [wikileaks.ch] to make it more palatable & passable, for NZ legislators

and instructed the government to implement a new security force [wikileaks.ch] to enforce it, even offering to assist in its initial funding. All that's missing is an offer to have American troops enforce the law for them.

This has been going on for decades

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a New Zealander and the lobbying from the US isn't a recent issue, in fact it has been regularly reported in the mainstream press for as long as I can remember and not only for copyright reasons. I think the worst part is that the US diplomats have at times threatened us with economically damaging measures for not playing ball (NZ does export a lot to the US and being a small country makes us vulnerable to change). I feel that we've actually done an OK job of pushing back in the past, but the US is both patient and happy to keep trying until it finds an administration that gives it favour, as has happened here.

To be honest I think that Australia is worse off from this sort of lobbying though. They haven't had an anti-nuclear past and this has led them to 'enjoy' a closer relationship with the US than we have(!)

Re:Democracy

[SuricouRaven]

Actually, in some places, you *are* expected to pay for that rain. It's not even that uncommon for states to sell exclusive rainwater collection rights to a water company, granting them and them alone the right to rainfall within a specified catchment area. If you live in one, then it is indeed an offense for you to collect your own rain and water your garden with it. You're expected to pay for it from the tap, like a good consumer should.

Re:Democracy

[SteveTheNewbie]

Bolivia is one such incident [wikipedia.org]. It was put in place by the world bank who demanded as part of a loan to get them back on their feet they privatise the water system and used to charge people up to 1/4 of their income on water. It was illegal to collect rainwater.

Not the first time the world bank has royally screwed up a country [wikipedia.org]. Just ask Jamaica [assatashakur.org] how that's working out for them..

Sorry for the wikipedia links, I'm sure people can find other examples, consider these starters.

Re:Democracy

[baKanale]

The state of Colorado [wikipedia.org] (along with some other western states) forbids collection of rainwater without a permit. While this seems insane to those of us from areas with frequent rain, this is largely due to the general scarcity of water in these areas and the system of allocating water rights [wikipedia.org] due to this fact. Water is such a contentious issue that the state of Wyoming took Colorado to the Supreme Court [wikipedia.org] over Colorado's plans to divert the Laramie River, which they claimed was a violation of their water rights, and Arizona and California [wikipedia.org] have gone to court nine times over the last 80-odd years to determine Arizona's cut of the water from the Colorado River.