Thomas Beagle, spokesperson for Tech Liberty, "We're very disappointed that the filter is now running, it's a sad day for the New Zealand internet."

The DIA refuses to say which other ISPs will be joining the filter, claiming the right to negotiate in secret. Tech Liberty understands that Telstra Clear, Telecom and Vodafone have said they will implement the filter, with Orcon, Slingshot and Natcom saying that they won't.

David Zanetti, technical spokesperson for Tech Liberty, "We fear that the filter will reduce the stability of the internet in New Zealand. It is a single point of failure, introduces a new and very tempting target for hackers, and by diverting traffic will cause issues with modern internet applications."

Tech Liberty is concerned about the expansion of government powers represented by the filter. It establishes the principle that the government can choose to arbitrarily set up a new censorship scheme and choose which material to block, with no reference to existing law. Even worse, the list of what is filtered is kept secret, in direct contrast to the rest of New Zealand's censorship regime where the Chief Censor must publish decisions banning offensive material.

The US government has recently spoken out against government filtering of the internet, with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton saying that "Those who disrupt the free flow of information in our society, or any other, pose a threat to our economy, our government and our civil society." She then said that the US is committed to helping people to circumvent government internet filtering.

About Tech Liberty

Tech Liberty is dedicated to protecting people’s rights in the areas of the Internet and technology. We make submissions on public policy, help to educate people about their rights, and defend those whose rights are being infringed.

Related Articles

Internet filtering frequently asked questions and answers - http://techliberty.org.nz/issues/internet-filtering/filtering-faq/

Why we oppose internet filtering - http://techliberty.org.nz/why-we-oppose-internet-filtering/

23 Feb 2009
Wellington, New Zealand

With the release of the text of the new copyright bill proposed at the end of 2009 we finally see the end of guilt on accusation, and see in place a sensible and well reasoned process around protecting copyrighted material. The new text deals with the majority of the issues that Tech Liberty has been concerned about, restores due process and privacy for those accused, and spells out a fair set of obligations and responsibilities for ISPs in handling users who infringe on copyright via their services.

Tech Liberty is disappointed to see that internet disconnection remains an option. Disconnection from the internet equates to disconnection from participation in civil society, and we do not believe this is an appropriate punishment for infringing copyright. However, we are pleased to see that it can only be applied by a court and the court must take into account the effect of termination on the users of the connection.

Thomas Beagle, Spokesperson for Tech Liberty: "Disconnection is a serious consequence, one we do not apply to other utilities that are used as part of a crime. However, the overall effect of the bill is positive and provides certainty to ISPs, users, and copyright holders on how infringement will be handled."

About Tech Liberty

Tech Liberty is dedicated to protecting people’s rights in the areas of the Internet and technology. We make submissions on public policy, help to educate people about their rights, and defend those whose rights are being infringed.

Related Articles

Internet disconnection is not an option.

Internet disconnection is impractical.

Commerce Minister Simon Power released a statement revealing an intended framework and policy to replace Section 92A of the Copyright Act. This section, meant to come into force this year, was suspended after a broad coalition of rights holders, ISPs, and stakeholders opposed the original vague and ill-defined wording.

The original text of the legislation did not specify how it was to be implemented nor the process around how infringement should be handled. It burdened ISPs with the responsibility to negotiate with rights holders on a process and penalties, while dictating that they must implement account termination. It removed the right of the accused to defend themselves against the accusations and made ISPs both judges and executioners. Furthermore it made ISPs liable if they failed to implement these hazy requirements correctly.

David Zanetti, Tech Liberty, "Once negotiations on the original S92 framework had broken down between ISPs and rights holders, it was clear the legislation was not going to work. It provided no party with a fair and consistent process for handling the infringement of rights".

At initial interpretation, the new intended framework corrects most of the problems identified and provides a fair and consistent process for rights holders to engage with ISPs and the courts to address infringement activities.

Tech Liberty is pleased to see the restoration of the courts as the only body which can impose penalties, and that the process retains the right to privacy, with ISPs passing notices back and forth rather than being obliged to give up account details to rights holders.

While disconnection is now a last resort, we are concerned that this remains an option as the Internet is a primary way for people to interact with civil society. There is also too much chance that disconnection will end up punishing more than the offender. The paper released today admits that there may be Bill of Rights implications with disconnection.

Thomas Beagle, Tech Liberty spokesperson, "While we will need to see the final wording of the legislation, the new process seems fairer and respects key civil liberties such as the right to a fair trial, something that the old legislation failed to do."

Tech Liberty remains concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) will require further changes. While ACTA has not yet been publicly released, officials admit that New Zealand laws may have to be changed to meet ACTA obligations.

David Zanetti, Tech Liberty, "ACTA will have its own processes that could undo the progress here. We caution the Government that, having consulted the public to develop a better solution, it would be a mistake to take a step backwards because of ACTA."

About Tech Liberty
Tech Liberty is dedicated to protecting people’s rights in the areas of the Internet and technology. We make submissions on public policy, help to educate people about their rights, and defend those whose rights are being infringed.

Ministry of Economic Development (MED) spokesperson George Wardle, at a briefing in Wellington today, said that they could not release the draft text of the treaty as all parties to the negotiation had agreed to keep it confidential. He also refused to say who in New Zealand they had consulted with and refused to reveal what New Zealand was arguing for. The Ministry of Economic Development is working with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade representing New Zealand's interests in the negotiations.

While no draft text has been officially released, leaks have shown that it has gone far beyond anti-counterfeiting to be a general rewrite of the rules of copyright in the name of international harmonisation. New Zealand has already been through a small-scale version of this with the attempts to insert a "three accusations and you're out" policy into section 92a of our copyright law. Section 92a was defeated by a broad coalition of artists, internet users and others, led by the Creative Freedom Foundation.

Thomas Beagle, spokesperson for Tech Liberty, "Section 92a could be defeated because it followed our normal democratic process. ACTA is an attempt to work around this, it's being negotiated in secret to avoid opposition. This secrecy is anti-democratic - it's not how we do things in an open society like New Zealand."

Other international agreements concerning copyright have been negotiated in the open. For example, the World Intellectual Property Organization administers 24 international treaties, each of which was developed in an open process. When asked why ACTA was not part of WIPO or WTO negotiations, Wardle responded: "Main participants can't get traction."

MFAT negotiator Peter Ferguson claims that New Zealand is pushing for the process to be more transparent: "We're saying let's be as up front as we can, other countries are reluctant."

ACTA has been linked to the Trans Pacific Partnership free trade agreement. Some fear that this free trade agreement will be used in an attempt to force New Zealand to sign up to ACTA as the cost of admittance.

David Zanetti, Tech Liberty, "We're not opposed to copyright. Copyright law may need to be reformed to adjust to the new realities of the digital age, but changes to the law must be done in an open and accountable fashion with everyone having a say."

Thomas Beagle, Tech Liberty, "If ACTA can't be negotiated in the open, New Zealand should have no part in it. Secrecy is the enemy of democracy and good government. New Zealand should withdraw from the ACTA negotiations until they are opened up for scrutiny."

Further Information
For more information on Tech Liberty's views about ACTA please see our article "ACTA and the New Copyright Deal" at http://techliberty.org.nz/acta-and-the-new-copyright-deal/

For more general background information about ACTA: http://techliberty.org.nz/issues/acta/acta-faq/

About Tech Liberty
Tech Liberty is dedicated to protecting people’s rights in the areas of the Internet and technology. We make submissions on public policy, help to educate people about their rights, and defend those whose rights are being infringed.