• Full Story

Internet piracy bill sparks calls for #blackout protest

Print

Wed, 13 Apr 2011 3:23p.m. LATEST 12:04AM

Repeat infringement offenders could have their internet connection suspended

Repeat infringement offenders could have their internet connection suspended

Parliament tonight debated under urgency a controversial bill designed to prevent illegal file sharing by Internet users, and it will be passed into law tomorrow.

The need to protect copyright material was recognised in 2008, when the previous Labour government introduced legislation which would have allowed internet users to be disconnected for repeat infringements.

That caused an outcry from user groups, and the current government put it on hold while it worked out a compromise.

The compromise, in the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill, was introduced in February last year and went through a long and contentious select committee process.

It allows copyright owners to send evidence of alleged infringements to internet service providers (ISPs), who will then send up to three infringement notices to the account holder.

If the warnings are ignored, the copyright owner can take a claim to the Copyright Tribunal and the tribunal can make awards of up to $15,000 against the account holder.

There is provision in the bill which would allow a copyright holder to apply through a court for suspension of service, but it won't come into force unless the Government considers the warning system isn't effective.

"Currently, copyright owners lack an effective enforcement measure against illegal file sharing," Defence Minister Wayne Mapp said tonight, speaking in Parliament on behalf of Commerce Minister Simon Power.

"The compromise provides the right balance between internet users and an effective deterrent against file sharing."

Labour's Clare Curran said her party would support the bill, and acknowledged that the legislation introduced by the previous government had caused "a grand stoush".

"In coming years, the Internet will become increasingly more essential in our lives," she said.

"Disconnection is a disproportionate remedy for file sharing...this bill represents a better law, although I know it won't satisfy everyone."

The bill was being debated tonight under urgency, called mainly to pass the Canterbury earthquake legislation.

The Government put several other bills on the urgency list which have been on the order paper for a long time, including the copyright legislation.

The bill went through its second reading, committee stage and most of its third reading stage tonight.

It will be passed soon after Parliament resumes at 9am tomorrow.

NZPA

The Government had earlier decided to scrap a controversial part of the Copyright Act before it became law.

If passed, it would have required internet providers to cut off customers whenever there is an allegation they have breached the copyright – guilt on association.

Although Mr Key acknowledged there is a definite need for tougher copyright infringement laws, he said the original legislation was fundamentally flawed.

The select committee heard overwhelming opposition to the clause and the legislation was revised.

The penalty remains but can only be brought into force by the minister by an order in council.

 

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

27 Apr 2011 02:17p.m.

sentinal wrote:

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=211282055556203 -protest internet cyber security bill

19 Apr 2011 07:23p.m.

I don't know my name wrote:

Dammit, torrents are the only way I can get certain T.V shows that don't air in NZ. This sucks

16 Apr 2011 11:20a.m.

Luke wrote:

This is just going to make every Kiwi pay a foreign company $10 every month to encrypt and hide their isp torrent downloads. That is what happened in the UK after similar legislation came in there.

14 Apr 2011 10:08p.m.

Sandeep wrote:

lets all go armish the government wont make any money then and they would lift the law

14 Apr 2011 10:01p.m.

Sandeep wrote:

lets all go armish the government wont make any money then and they would lift the law

14 Apr 2011 07:43p.m.

Heather wrote:

This is completely ridiculous!! It's disgusting, yet another attempt to control our every movement. I thought we lived in a democracy, not a big brother state dictatorship. Outrageous!

14 Apr 2011 12:02p.m.

Anon wrote:

@ Webber If an ISP makes a public statement about this I will gladly switch to them

14 Apr 2011 11:42a.m.

Reuben Tilley wrote:

@Webber thank you for making that change! which ISP are you? ill be glad to switch

14 Apr 2011 08:54a.m.

Webber wrote:

As the owner and a major shareholder of an ISP, We will simply be putting fees against claims for information or disconnection. For information regarding a customer it will cost $2500 +GST and come with a court order. To have us disconnect a customer it will cost $4400 +GST as well as loss of customer income for the set period of disconnection (6 Months?) and will also require a court order. With fees like this, no company will ask us to disconnect anybody! This S92 is of course totally unworkable, people that have been cut off will just go to another ISP.

14 Apr 2011 02:15a.m.

shorty wrote:

another rushed bill, and this is only nationals first term, they have hit people so damn hard, i hate to think whats going to happen to this country if they get in again, in fact im ready to pack my bags and move to aus if they do.