Termination of illegal downloaders' accounts too severe - artists

Email
Print

Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:00a.m.

The Ministry of Economic Development's law proposal was released for public comment yesterday

The Ministry of Economic Development's law proposal was released for public comment yesterday

A trust of New Zealand artists says a proposal to terminate the internet accounts of those who repeatedly breach copyright is a step too far.

The Creative Freedom Foundation, a non-profit trust representing about 1000 artists, welcomed the Ministry of Economic Development's proposal on the vexed question of internet copyright, which was released for public comment yesterday.

A document recommended a three-phase process to allow copyright holders to pursue those who breach their rights, starting with complaints to the internet service provider but with a final stage allowing the Copyright Tribunal to order damages, injunctions, fines and the termination of internet accounts for persistent breaches of intellectual property.

CFF director Bronwyn Holloway-Smith said the proposal was a considerable improvement, but went too far with the termination of internet accounts.

"As artists, we don't want people's internet taken away to protect our copyright. This is too severe a punishment, and many consider it to be a breach of human rights," she said.

There were also problems over the definition of an ISP and considerable costs to businesses for tracking hardware.

"While there are a few creases to iron out, we are optimistic that the Government is on the right track to creating a great solution for New Zealand that supports and protects both creative and public rights."

InternetNZ executive director Keith Davidson said the proposal was a "mixed bag" and said the threat of termination was over the top and risked causing a backlash from internet users.

Commerce Minister Simon Power released the discussion document, saying he wanted a fair and efficient process to address copyright offending.

"Unlawful file-sharing is very costly to New Zealand's creative industries and I am determined to deal with it," Mr Power said.

Labour's communications and IT spokeswoman Clare Curran said the Government was trying to please everyone and would end up pleasing no one.

"A termination policy is unlikely to work. International attempts to introduce similar policies haven't worked to date," Ms Curran said.

"While the involvement of a third party, the Copyright Tribunal, to resolve copyright issues and adjudicate on them is welcome, there is no detail about how this would work."

The document seeks public comment by August 7.

NZPA

 

Watch the video of Helen Baxter of Mohawk Media speaking to Sunrise.

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

07 Aug 2009 10:10a.m.

Sam Blackstock wrote:

How dumb is it for these internet companies to block illegal downloading. Alot of downloading comes from younger people who dont have a job anyway and go to school to put music on their ipods. Also, when internet companies are going to monitor this activity, the companies are going to lose money because people will stop buying big usage plans because they have no point as there will be nothing worth downloading on the internet. Government=idiots

01 Aug 2009 10:25p.m.

Mr Bravo wrote:

BT Junkie 4ever mwahahahaha I just did a search to check that I can still do illegal downloading and found this site, so looks like its still "legal" lol... for now. For persistent offending I'd say cutting internet connections is ok AS LONG AS they give a warning or two before they snip snip, in which case I would have to give up my life of mass downloading lol. P.S. I'm not really a pirate... but I suppose i would say that ;)

18 Jul 2009 07:27a.m.

will wrote:

i wouldn't have brought the damn movie anyway i only downloaded it because it was there

17 Jul 2009 06:19p.m.

Gregory wrote:

How is this going to work in the flatting situation where many users are connected through one router? I would suggest that the flatmates using the internet legitimately will be fairly annoyed when their internet gets cut off due to no fault of their own.

17 Jul 2009 01:06p.m.

Alien wrote:

Rob, because legally you are allowed to record from the television for the purpose of watching latter. There is something in the law about how long you are allowed to hold on to that copy, but it is legal.

15 Jul 2009 10:57p.m.

Greg wrote:

Rob & Nigel are right on the truth.

What is missing though is the deaper truth, downloading a blockbusters does not affect artists, they have already been paid.

Those doing the complaining are the Billion dollar movie corporations who cry poverty. Yet if you look at whats being downloaded, most of the titles are making more money than any of us will see in a life time.

It's all about CAPITALISM, greed and going to all lenghts to squeeze the last drop from what they peddle, even if it is tripe.

With piracy the "Dark Night"for example racked up over a Billion Dollars.....WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH!!!!

It seems that creating legislation and invasivness into private citizens doings, bearing in mind the scratch this "crime" inflicts on a multi Billion Dollar industry would be well worth serious reconsideration.

Ministers might be proud of their acheivements, but the public has the last say, dont ever forget, we got you in...we can get you out and reverse what you might take pridein now!

15 Jul 2009 12:48p.m.

Matthew wrote:

Hi folks,

The NZPA article says that there are "1000 artists" in the Creative Freedom Foundation. Just to clarify, the CFF have 20,000 members of which 10,000 are artists (it seems the NZPA dropped a zero along the way).

We've written up a review of the draft proposal here:
http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=347

Thanks!

15 Jul 2009 12:08p.m.

Rob wrote:

How can the Government justify clamping down on internet users who breach copyright and blatantly ignore the likes of Sky TV amongst others that not only supply, but publicly advertise the technology to breach these same copyright laws:

(MY SKY HDi has arrived and it will change the way you watch television forever.

You can pause and rewind live TV, RECORD every episode of your favorite shows at the touch of a button, and then store programmes until you're ready to watch them.

You can even RECORD two channels at the same time, while watching a third. What's more, it can be installed on any standard or high definition televisions, from just $15 extra per month.)

If the internet users are getting picked on, then why not everyone else. Anyone that has any form of copying, recording, taping, etc should be brought in under the same copyright infringement laws.

Too hard though isn't it.

Everyone owns at least one of these: a VCR, DVD Recorder, audio tape deck, CD Recorder and that means that EVERYONE HAS breached copyright laws in one form or another, including those who are in the Government (Big Brother is watching) that are trying to push this law through.

A more interesting question is how do they know what is being downloaded, Trojan Horses? Key Logging? Illegal Searches of our computers from some hidden location? What form of breach of an individual’s privacy are they going to use, and what’s next? Telling us which sites we can and can’t view, once it starts where will it end?

Where movies are concerned, the movie making companies need to re-think their method of release, the Box Office is no longer the way to go, more and more people are spending large amounts of money to create their own home theatre, the people want to be able to watch these new films in the comfort of their own home on their home theatres, so why make us wait six months to a year to release on DVD, two to three months is long enough, the lack of patients is where the pirates come in, they can provide in less than one month. People are more likely to wait two to three months for the DVD than suffer a cam-job (movie filmed in a theatre on a handy cam) released in less than one month. Therefore you reduce the piracy rate in a more efficient and less invasive method.

15 Jul 2009 11:44a.m.

Aaron wrote:

What about those people who are downloading at WiFi or free wireless internet places.

15 Jul 2009 11:11a.m.

nigel wrote:

Illegal downloaders costing our industry millions, what nonsense. With all due and real respect to New Zealand artists. It is movies like Wolverine and Underworld 3 music from Lady Gaga and Michael Jackson, Hollywood stuff that gets downloaded.
Powers should fess up it’s the American free trade deal that is behind all this not New Zealand artists.

This talk of copyright holder’s rights makes me laugh, sure they have rights but it is about money not morality, odd how the two become confused.

Not all rights are equal; the loss of copyright holders rights is a consequence of an overarching collection of far more important human rights. Better the internet a “Wild West” than a police state.