Kiwicon – The government is your friend
Posted on November 7, 2011
The government is your friend and wants you to be happy.
This is the transcript of a speech given by Thomas Beagle at Kiwicon in Wellington on November 6th, 2011.
Tagged as: censorship, copyright, Customs, DIA, due process, filtering, free trade, Internet, Law Commission, MED, privacy, right to silence, Search and Surveillance, TPP, USA
Continue reading
Copyright Notices
Received a copyright infringement notice from your ISP? We'd love a copy. Email them to us at contact@techliberty.org.nz
Subscribe
Popular Posts
What you need to know about the new copyright law
Internet Filtering Technical FAQ
Internet disconnection is not an option
ACTA and the new copyright deal
Contribute
We're interested in publishing any articles relevant to Tech Liberty in New Zealand.
Contact us.
Recent Posts
- Te Papa doesn’t know why it’s censoring the internet
- Guest post: The operation of NZ’s internet censorship filter
- Survey shows opposition to mandatory govt internet filter
- New Media submission opposes media regulation
- TPP Update
- MegaUpload arrests in New Zealand
- Requirements for valid copyright infringement notices
- Are some Copyright Infringement notices invalid?
- Is your mobile company spying on you?
- Kiwicon – The government is your friend
@techliberty Twitter
- Are these police officers in Wellington breaking their own rules by hiding in order to catch speeders? http://t.co/XyX0lQGt 4 days ago
- Te Papa responds to an OIA request - on our website! http://t.co/Li7LjoIs Sadly he confuses the DIA filter with Te Papa's. 4 days ago
- Chris Wood asks why we should put up with NZ police snooping on innocent citizens: http://t.co/8lRW16HF 5 days ago
- TPP Watch bulletin: http://t.co/iWP0PXe6 1 week ago
- RT @timClicks: Don’t trade away our digital future, excellent article from @susan_chalmers http://t.co/VkYUT4ax 1 week ago

Updated: Jailing People for Remaining Silent
The new Search and Surveillance Bill includes provisions to force people who own and manage computer systems to give full access to those systems. This includes the obligation to give up passwords to enable the authorities to access encrypted information.
Of course, this assumes that the person involved actually has the password. It's quite common for someone running a system to not be able to break the encryption used by other users to secure their data. Will the courts understand that? And even if they understand that, will they believe it?