Tech Liberty has made a submission to the Ministry of Economic Development on their discussion document for the regulations surrounding the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Act recently passed into law.
Our submission argues that ISPs are being increasingly put into a difficult position of escalating compliance costs imposed by regulations such as this, while having a very limited ability to prevent the behaviour creating those costs. We believe ISPs should not be involved in any way shape or form in determining what end users can and cannot do with the Internet.
The submission also addresses the re-opening of debate around the division of costs, as the discussion document has again raised the possibility that ISPs will bear significant setup and on-going costs in handling these notices. We also note that information provided to those being accused of infringing copyright should be full and complete, and sufficient to assist account holders in identifying the root source of the claim of infringement.
Full submission: Tech Liberty Submission on Copyright Infringing Filesharing Act Regulations [PDF].
Call for submissions on regulations for new copyright law
The Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Bill has been passed and now the Ministry of Economic Development has to develop the detailed regulations that will define the processes described within the Bill. They have asked for submissions and have released a discussion document (link currently not working due to failure on MED site).
The main topics are:
- The procedures around rights owners sending notices to IPAPs (internet service providers), IPAPs sending them on to account holders, and account holders challenging the notices.
- The method that the Copyright Tribunal will use to calculate penalties.
- The fees charged by IPAPs (ISPs) to the rights owners for handling the notices.
The following points are of note:
- The draft list of requirements for a notice includes proof that the complainant does hold the copyright for the work being copied. The complainant must also have a New Zealand address for service.
- The Ministry favours leaving the Copyright Tribunal to set the penalties with minimal guidance.
- The discussion paper says that ISPs making submissions should work out their costs as if they were processing 5000 notices per month. Each!
We'll be doing a submission aimed at making this inherently flawed law work as fairly as possible.
Wikileaked US cables about s92A and TPP
Idiot Savant at No Right Turn has been keeping an eye on the flood of documents coming from Wikileaks and brought our attention to two of them:
From April 2009, this cable (09WELLINGTON88) is a general backgrounder on the events around the rise and fall of section 92A of the Copyright Act. The US bias towards the rights owners is clear and the cable makes it clear that the US government would be pressuring the NZ government to hurry in the redrafting of the law - and even offers to help. The following quote will worry anyone who has been following IP issues in the US:
U.S. agencies have the benefit of 10 years worth of experience in enforcing the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act that may serve useful to New Zealand officials in their effort to implement section 92A.
From February 2010, this cable about TPP (10WELLINGTON65) is amusing because the MFAT officials are telling the US that the perception in New Zealand that a free trade agreement with the US will lead to be a big increase in trade is over-hyped. The officials also admit that intellectual property (copyright, trademarks, patents) and pharmaceuticals will be contentious issues in NZ.
New Zealand has sought a Free Trade Agreement with the United States for some time. As part of most trade agreements between much larger markets and smaller countries like New Zealand, the inevitable concessions are made by a smaller country for the longer-term gain in access to the market.
In the past, this was mostly around the timing of subsidies and the speed with which access to the market happened for each party. However, more recently the realm of Intellectual Property Rights have become a core part of the concessions a smaller country must make in order to do business with the United States.
We're interested in publishing any articles relevant to Tech Liberty in New Zealand.
Techliberty on TwitterMy Tweets
- New content now added at NZ Council for Civil Liberties
- Speech about RealMe, big data & power
- Problems with Customs having the power to force decryption
- The GCSB’s brake on innovation
- Can the NZ Police search your phone if you’re arrested?
- Update on automated number plate recognition (ANPR)
- Report: Eyes on New Zealand
- Privacy isn’t dead
- Is RealMe a threat to our liberty?
- HDC Bill reported back by the Select Committee
- HDC Bill: oral submission
- Submission: Harmful Digital Communications Bill
- HDC Bill and criminalising free speech
- Safe harbours in HDC Bill are a threat to freedom of expression
- TICS – Second spy law passes
- Changes to the TICS Bill
- Next: the TICS Bill
- Does the new GCSB Bill give them the power to spy on New Zealanders?
- Application of Human Rights to Communication Surveillance
- Speech to the Auckland public meeting against the GCSB Bill
- Opposition to the GCSB Bill
- TICS Bill – Oral Submission
- GCSB Bill – Oral Submission
- Open letter to John Key – the right to know
- Submission: GCSB Bill
- Will the GCSB ban Apple from New Zealand?
- Submission – Telecommunications (Interception Capability & Security) Bill
- GCSB’s new powers for wide-spread spying on New Zealanders
- DIA now filtering .. Google?
- Does the TICS Bill really give the GCSB control and oversight of NZ telecommunications?