On the 14th of July a discussion document – Section 92A Review Policy Proposal Document (full PDF)- was released by Justice Minister Simon Power. The document has been a work in progress taking several months to complete, undertaken by a working group consisting of: experts in the fields of intellectual property and internet law and officials from the Ministry of Economic Development.
The review document is intended to address some of the problems which plagued the initial version of Section 92A, i.e. the lack of recourse or any kind of appeal process to those accused of infringing copyright and the burden of enforcement that was to be assigned to ISPs.
While the three-strikes till disconnection is still on the menu the review document has allowed for an appeal process which is handled though a mediator: The Copyright Tribunal READ MORE from NZ HERALD
The three-phase process as outlined by Simon Power:
1) Where there has been suspected infringement, rights-holders could complain to the internet service provider (ISP) which would notify the subscriber. If there was further infringement, a cease-and-desist order would be sent.
2) If there was further infringement, the rights-holder could apply to the Copyright Tribunal for an order to obtain the subscriber’s name and contact details.
3) The rights-holder could then serve an infringement notice. The subscriber could elect mediation. If that failed or there was no response, the tribunal would convene, and could impose penalties ranging from fines to termination of a user’s internet account.
Reaction to the review proposal
In a press release on Scoop the Creative Freedom Foundation (CFF) director Bronwyn Holloway-Smith welcomed the proposal document and acknowledged the improvements found in the introduction of an independent tribunal. However she argues that internet disconnection is too severe a punishment,
there are still some concerns for us. It’s unfortunate to see NZ not following international trends by holding on to internet termination as a punishment. 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
Bronwyn Holloway-Smith also states that issue surrounding defining an ISP should have been resolved and included in the review. She also says that there should be a fine for false accusation. Overall, she said “there are a few creases to iron out” but they (CFF) “are optimistic that government is on the right track…”
InternetNz also have some issues with the review proposal sighting concerns about internet disconnection and they question the ‘complexities’ of phase 2 and 3 and the costs that would be passed on to ISPs and copyright holders READ MORE
Labour’s spokesperson for communication and IT, CLare Curran has also crticised the threat of disconnection, argueing that financial penalties would be more suitable. She has also floated some alternatives to current copyight legislation READ MORE
Public submissions on the Review Policy Proposal Document close on 7 August 2009.
[...] would achieve more than disconnection from the internet. She also raises concerns about whether the Copyright Tribunal- a key factor in the proposed redraft -will have sufficient resources to process infingement [...]
[...] July 2009 Minister Simon Power released a discussion document – the Section 92A Review Policy Proposal Document. The document took several months to complete and was undertaken by a working group, including [...]