Section 92A part II

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Section 92A part II

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#241747 3-Aug-2009 12:27

From NZFACT:

NZFACT LABELS S92A COPYRIGHT PROPOSAL PROBLEMATIC

"New Zealand audiences and artists stand to lose unless the government strengthens the proposal to build a framework for stopping online movie piracy,? Tony Eaton, Executive Director of the New Zealand Federation Against Copyright Theft (NZFACT), said today. "Six months ago, New Zealand was a world leader in attacking this problem. Today, with the proposal the government has put on the table, we are moving backward and threatening the growth of new entertainment options."

Eaton's comments came in reaction to the new policy proposal to implement amendments to the copyright law (section 92A) that require internet service providers (ISP) to sanction subscribers who repeatedly illegally download pirated materials.

"We need a strong workable policy that delivers a safe and secure environment to foster the creation of a thriving online marketplace. This can be achieved with the cooperation of all parties involved in online content delivery," Eaton said.

Mr. Eaton added that the film and television industry is an important contributor to the New Zealand economy. "The screen industry provides 15,000 jobs and is worth $2.7billion. Its continued growth is dependent upon a legal regime that values creative work."

"The film and television industry, through NZFACT, has been urging the government to help create a process to curb the activities of repeat copyright infringers." Eaton added. "We are looking for a workable, shared process that involves education, then warnings from the ISPs, and finally, escalating measures for those who refuse to stop," he said.

"Contrary to the current s92A proposal, ISPs need to play an equal role in this partnership. And that means when rightholders identify infringements, ISPs need to play the central and lead role in communicating with their subscribers about the infringements, as well as the consequences of their activities. Then, the ISPs need to work with us to educate their subscribers and implement measures to stop repeated infringement."

"ISPs, as our partners in building this online market and as responsible corporate citizens, must play an active role in reaching out to their customers about the importance of copyright and enforcing their own terms and conditions with regards to customers who repeatedly engage in online infringement.

"We are also concerned about the possibility of every infringement being referred to the Copyright Tribunal without any limitations. We recognize that there may be a need to facilitate a process for the resolution of disputes in certain circumstances but, with the level of internet piracy in New Zealand, this proposal opens the door for tens of thousands of infringement notices to be referred to the Tribunal with associated costs and delays," said Eaton.

"We will be making a full submission to the government in the hope that the legislation will achieve its stated policy objective of providing effective relief to rights holders impacted by digital copyright infringement and to deter future infringement," he said.

ENDS

Piracy in New Zealand
A study undertaken by independent research firm LEK Consulting on behalf of the Motion Picture Association (MPA) showed that piracy cost the film industry in New Zealand an estimated 25 percent of the potential market in 2005 ? $70 million. Internet piracy via P2P file-sharing networks is a significant concern and accounts for the majority of New Zealand movie industry losses ? an estimated $33 million in lost consumer spending in 2005. NZFACT represents the MPA in New Zealand.

About NZFACT: The New Zealand Federation Against Copyright Theft was established in 2005 by the Motion Picture Association to protect the film industry in New Zealand from the adverse impact of copyright theft.

NZFACT works closely with its members, government and enforcement authorities to protect the New Zealand film and television industry, retailers and movie fans. NZFACT members include: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, New Zealand; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Sony Pictures Releasing International Corporation; Twentieth Century Fox International Corporation; Universal International Films, Inc.; and Warner Bros. Pictures International, a division of Warner Bros. Pictures Inc.
NZFACT works in association with the Motion Picture Association, which represents the interests of the film industry across the world. NZFACT also has an alliance with the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand to share information regarding copyright infringement, and is a member of the recently-formed Anti Counterfeiting Group, which represents the interests of New Zealand?s major intellectual property stakeholders, such as the music industry, computer software and publishing.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

rugrat

3088 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#241870 3-Aug-2009 16:45

"this proposal opens the door for tens of thousands of infringement notices to be referred to the Tribunal with associated costs and delays," said Eaton."

Wow. If they have their way tens of thousands of internet accounts would be closed.

If each account averages an isp $100 a month (more likely more if a big downloaders doing what accused of doing) for every 10,000 closed that's a loss of revenue of 1 million dollars per month to the isps, and also this money not moving around in NZ economy, unless spent on something else.

I believe the loss's and no new creative content above well exaggerated.

1. Just because someone downloads something it doesn't mean it's a lost sale.

2. For me I have sky hd, quite happy to wait for 2 years for movie to get there, it's in hd, dolby digital. With NZ data caps works out way less hassle and cheaper this way then downloading - i.e. not everyone would download even if was legal, Too much data to get great quality.

I was thinking of buying a music cd couple years back, as soon as I saw the copy protected part on the back I put it back on the shelf, that was a lost sale. Haven't bothered looking at any cds since.

Same with Red Alert 3 PC, as soon saw internet connection required put it back on shelf. As suspected found out later after 5 installs it will no longer install even though still have original disk. Have bought PS3 version since, as far as I know no limitation on how many PS3's can install to.

So if sales are down, it'll be more that potential customer hasn't accepted terms of sale i.e drm, limited use of product, and new technologies, i.e better in home movie etc experience, plus more choice of in home entertainment, and yes some things people download would've brought if hadn't, but the movie industry etc seem to be blaming all the drop on this.

Don't know what the answer is but don't think the law change will make any difference, as I think under current laws they can pursue file sharers.

Think in the US even after started prosecuting, amount of people file sharing kept growing.

Regs

4064 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#241963 3-Aug-2009 19:29

they mentioned tonight that United Video rental returns were down by $20m and that was pretty much because of internet downloading.

I'd like to wager that the release of "MySky", "SKY Movies on demand" and now freeview and other PVR's has made/will make a large impact in this area. Using the PVR devices people can book and record dozens of movies and play them back whenever they like.

One of the reasons for people hiring DVDs was due to the fact that SKY and TV were inconvenient ways to see movies.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

old3eyes

9111 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#242148 4-Aug-2009 08:32

Regs: they mentioned tonight that United Video rental returns were down by $20m and that was pretty much because of internet downloading.

I'd like to wager that the release of "MySky", "SKY Movies on demand" and now freeview and other PVR's has made/will make a large impact in this area. Using the PVR devices people can book and record dozens of movies and play them back whenever they like.

One of the reasons for people hiring DVDs was due to the fact that SKY and TV were inconvenient ways to see movies.

I suspect that Sky's own version of "Netflix" on line ordering and snail mail DVD rentals has also had an impact on local DVD rentals..

Regards,

Old3eyes

Regs

4064 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#242500 4-Aug-2009 16:52

old3eyes:

I suspect that Sky's own version of "Netflix" on line ordering and snail mail DVD rentals has also had an impact on local DVD rentals..

oops. dvdunlimited/fatso etc - yes another big impact on united video's declining revenue. forgot to include them even though i use them :-]

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#243382 6-Aug-2009 10:23

Press release from CFF:

“Earlier this year New Zealand came dangerously close to implementing the harshest, and most draconian of copyright laws anywhere in the world. This law would have seen innocent people punished based on mere accusations” states CFF Director, Bronwyn Holloway-Smith, “No wonder so many people called it the Guilt Upon Accusation law.”

Last month the Ministry of Economic Development released their Policy Proposal Document for public comment, with submissions due this Friday 7th August before 5pm.

“The new MED proposal is a considerable improvement and it makes the sensible decision to empower independent experts to judge the merit of allegations – a practical necessity considering that 30% of NZ copyright lawsuits fail to even prove ownership. You'd hope that justice wouldn't be controversial but this week has seen NZFACT renew calls for accusers to judge the accused and for the removal of New Zealander's fundamental right to trial.”

“It's disappointing to see NZFACT not advocating for publicly respectable copyright law. It's a shortsighted approach that is doing great harm to public respect for copyright and other artistic rights.” says Bronwyn Holloway-Smith, “the CFF believe that fundamental rights should never be sacrificed due to a lack of patience.”

The MED proposal includes Internet Termination, a form of punishment that has fallen out of favour internationally, with nations in the EU rejecting it entirely.

“Unfortunately however, Internet Termination is still in the MED proposal. This was one of the main concerns of the former s92A and an issue that saw tens of thousands of New Zealanders join our Internet Blackout campaign in protest.”

“The internet is part of modern free speech, and with essential services moving online termination may hinder people's ability to pay bills, operate their business or do their job, access banking, news, health care records, education, and talk to friends and family.”

“In future years the internet will continue to become more pervasive and internet termination will be seen as increasingly unfair, and comparable to cutting off someone's electricity, phone or post service. It's already essential to many New Zealand businesses” says Bronwyn Holloway-Smith, “There are alternatives such as targeted fines which would allow compensation to artists rather than the inventive punishment of termination which has been ruled out in many countries such as the UK.”

“As artists, and copyright owners, we believe that there needs to be greater awareness and respect for artist's rights, but we don't want to see the removal of basic justice, or disproportionate punishments like internet termination.”

The CFF urge artists and the wider public alike to have their say. More information can be found in their latest newsletter http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=376

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#244734 10-Aug-2009 14:53

Release from InternetNZ today:

InternetNZ calls for “Notice and Notice” system to replace Section 92A
Media Release – 10 August 2009

InternetNZ (Internet New Zealand Inc) has today released its submission to the MED’s review of Section 92A of the Copyright Act, proposing a notice and notice system in New Zealand as a preferred response to the issue of illicit peer-to-peer filesharing.

“Enforcement of copyright needs to be a balance between users’ rights and the rights of content creators. A notice and notice system provides the right balance for New Zealand,” says InternetNZ’s spokesperson Jordan Carter.

“Notices have been shown to reduce infringement. A system that sends notices to alleged infringers is a low cost, clean response to illicit peer-to-peer file sharing. It is consistent with the first part of the Government’s proposal.

InternetNZ welcomes the Government’s clearer and fairer approach to the issue, compared with the law that is being replaced.

The submission details the principles InternetNZ thinks should guide policy in this area, and proposes a notice and notice system based on recent developments in the UK.

It sets out why the Government’s proposal has costs that will outweigh any possible benefits.

“The Government’s proposal would see the creation of an expensive and bureaucratic system involving the Copyright Tribunal that would add costs for government, ISPs and rights holders,” says Carter.

“A notice system should instead be implemented and its results assessed.
We anticipate that it will be cost-effective and obviate the need for costly and complex procedures that will not deliver corresponding benefits.

“InternetNZ reiterates in its submission its absolute opposition to termination being a remedy for copyright infringement by New Zealanders.

“Termination is an inappropriate and disproportionate remedy that will not work. Whatever approach the government takes to replacing section 92A, termination must be off the table,” says Carter.

InternetNZ’s submission is available on its website at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/issues/submissions

jpollock

600 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#244746 10-Aug-2009 15:04

I find it funny that instead of coming to the table, the media companies are hardening their line.

I know that I was extremely unimpressed with the MPAA over the past week. They've done nothing but cause me problems.

---
http://blog.jason.pollock.ca

SepticSceptic

2158 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#244753 10-Aug-2009 15:10

Rightly or wrongly, I've submitted my 2 cents worth to MED :-)

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#244863 10-Aug-2009 17:29

The Aotearoa Digital Arts network was formed by and for New Zealand artists who use digital media. We hold regular symposia and maintain a vibrant email discussion list. Our main focus is on visual arts in the traditional gallery-centric sense, though many of our 200 or so members are primarily musicians, theatre practitioners, film-makers, writers, or otherwise artistically oriented. Some of us are also members of the CFF and APRA and other groups that purport to represent artists, but ADA is not affiliated with them.

In July we discussed Section 92, and copyright in general, on our mailing list. Although our members have widely ranging views, there were some points of consensus:

* We think disconnection is an excessive response. Most digital artists depend on internet connections for their livelihood, and many of us use shared connections in studios, offices, or flats. Disconnecting what seems like an infringing account from the ISP's point of view may well affect several innocent people, perhaps drastically.

* We are not all particularly fond of fines either, as they punish in inverse proportion to wealth, but we prefer them to disconnection.

* The sending of notices is fine.

* Most of us support the idea of copyright in general, if only due to a lack of plausible alternatives. Those who suggested we oppose
copyright as a concept were proposing this as a posture and not meaning to eschew its protection for their own work.

* We are all users of open licenses, whether as consumers or producers, and most believe they are a useful option for artists. Although it may not seem directly relevant to the section 92 review, copyright law should be written with support for these kinds of licenses in mind.

Somebody also suggested a surcharge on internet traffic that could be redirected toward artists, but this was not widely supported. Another person proposed a set of rites that downloaders should perform that would put them in a grateful frame of mind. Although this may not be legally practical, it is interesting to shift the debate from the damage to rights holders profits to the damage inflicted upon downloaders souls by an excessive sense of entitlement and greed.

The email list discussion can be found here:

http://list.waikato.ac.nz/pipermail/ada_list/2009-July/date.html

regards,

Douglas Bagnall
(on behalf of the Aotearoa Digital Arts trust)

Lias

5575 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#244866 10-Aug-2009 17:32

SepticSceptic: Rightly or wrongly, I've submitted my 2 cents worth to MED :-)

Ditto. RIANZ/BSA/etc will probably put a contract on me becuase I said NZ should decriminalize non commercial copying of anything

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

jpollock

600 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#245104 11-Aug-2009 09:56

Personally, I think we need to separate distribution from copying. Combining them made sense when the only copying you did was for distribution. Not anymore.

You should be able to copy anything you want. Giving it to someone else is something else entirely.

Bundling it all together under "copyright" validates the position of the content producers (software/music/video) that they are allowed to dictate how we use things we've bought.

However, all that is besides the point for S92, which is about the distribution portion of copyright. Personally, I think that any disconnection or fine should be done in front of a tribunal, and not done in batches.

The media companies want to run a parallel justice system with the right to fine/disconnect without having to run a prosecution service.

Has any other industry managed that?

---
http://blog.jason.pollock.ca

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#246144 13-Aug-2009 17:10

TUANZ submission in pdf format is here.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79060 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#261690 6-Oct-2009 14:13

An update on this, released today:

6 October 2009

Replacement To 'Guilt Upon Accusation' Law Approaches

The Creative Freedom Foundation say that Commerce Minister Simon Power may decide the future of the former Guilt Upon Accusation law, section 92A of the Copyright Amendment Act, within weeks. The law was described as draconian by Prime Minister John Key and it resulted in widespread public protest before being scrapped in March, pending a redraft.

CFF Director, Bronwyn Holloway-Smith, said today that "Minister Power's redrafting process has made a lot of sense so far and we have been encouraged to see that the government seems intent on avoiding going back to s92A's draconian predecessor."

"Internet termination is a major issue that is yet to be resolved. We don't terminate a family's postal service if one person uses it to break the law.
We don't terminate a family's electricity if one person plays music too loudly. The internet is part of modern participation in society, and termination will unfairly affect peoples' ability to pay bills, to do business, to read news, email friends, and participate in democracy. Simply put, internet termination is an inventive and ridiculous punishment that will harm many people for the actions of one." she further stated.

"Copyright infringement is wrong but we won't win the hearts and minds of New Zealanders with a draconian punishment like termination. We need fair, targeted penalties like fines, supported by good education about copyright."

"It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, and with that in mind NZFACT are calling for New Zealanders to be presumed guilty until proven innocent yet again. NZFACT flew an Hollywood lobbyist over to argue that New Zealanders shouldn't have the same rights that are afforded to United States
citizens."

"Here and abroad studies have shown that 30-37% of accusations of copyright infringement are false, with 57% of cases being businesses targeting competitors. These facts are backed by experts and independent studies, whereas industry claims of lost sales due to illegal downloads have been exposed as unscientific. The Australian government have labeled piracy statistics as "self-serving hyperbole" in a draft government report to their Attorney General."

"NZFACT claim that millions of dollars are lost to online infringement despite not actually selling box office movies online, which raises the obvious question of whether millions are lost due to illegal downloads, or unsatisfied customers."

"They seek have to extraordinary powers to terminate people's internet accounts, but thankfully the redrafting process shows no signs of relying on hearsay and speculation."

New Zealanders are encouraged to learn more at http://CreativeFreedom.org.nz to send respectful emails to Minister Simon Power on s.power@ministers.govt.nz about the value of due process and their thoughts on internet termination.

------------------------------------------

"FACTS AND FIGURES"

Former head of New Zealand's Copyright Tribunal, Judge Harvey, has said that 30% of New Zealand copyright litigation fails due to a failure to prove ownership, or due to the copyright not being governed by New Zealand law.

According to a UCLA study (2008), 37% of US claims of online copyright infringement are invalid, and 57% of claims are businesses against competitors.

The Australian government have labeled piracy statistics as "self-serving hyperbole" in a draft government report. A confidential briefing for the Attorney-General's Department, prepared by the Australian Institute of Criminology, lashes the music and software sectors. The draft of the institute's intellectual property crime report, sighted by The Australian shows that copyright owners "failed to explain" how they reached financial loss statistics used in lobbying activities and court cases.

Source: http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,20713160-15306,00.html

The Creative Freedom Foundation is a not-for-profit trust representing 20,000 New Zealanders, including 10,000 artists (musicians, film makers, visual artists, designers, writers, & performers). The trust founded in 2008 in response to changes in copyright law and the effect these changes are having on creativity, the economy, and public rights. Through education and advocacy, the CFF seek to encourage, and promote New Zealand artist's views on issues that have the potential to influence their collective creativity.

Ragnor

8196 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#261828 6-Oct-2009 20:05

100% agree with Creative Freedom, hope they keep up the good work.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5