coffee.geek.nz

short version of how crap laws happen in NZ: after the public get their say and select commitee comes to a conclusion, a last second amendment happens to the bill/act in the house

unfolding today:

RT @gnat for fuck's sake, software patents back on the table in NZ? http://bit.ly/aBnsnz this is the same backdoor post-select-committee lobbying that saw S92A (the "Judith Tizard's Career in Politics Memorial Amendment") added.

RT @lightweight #NZICT & #MS failed to submit on #SWPatents to select committee. Easier to influence the Govt directly after the fact. Reprehensible.

http://www.coffee.geek.nz/sites/default/files/images/screenshot-p4s-dele...

Torrent freak, a news site for those who participate in torrent networks (legal or otherwise) is claiming "Kiwi 3 Strikes Anti-Piracy Bill Receives Unanimous Support".
http://torrentfreak.com/kiwi-3-strikes-anti-piracy-bill-receives-unanimo...

However, that is incorrect. Support was not unanimous. Clare Curran, Labour Party MP spoke up on twitter that her speech was not 100% supportive of the new bill. (Labour is NZ's largest opposition party) Here's the speech http://tinyurl.com/2egf9sc
(It's a little bit tl;dr for me.. sorry Clare, i have way less time now in between changing nappies on a small person - can has podcast version?).

What is supported unanimous, is the removal of "guilt by accusation" that was in the 2008 amendment by the last Labour government and supported by the National party (the Greens and maori party did not support the 2008 amendment)

In the new 2010 amendment (still before parliament), a risk adverse ISP is finally not required to act upon accusations alone and disconnect their customers in order to avoid liability themselves. The new bill, as currently written, ensures that ISPs are never expected to judge the merits of any accusation like they were under the 2008 amendment. It was ridiculous to expect an ISP to know the difference between a song you bought, a song you stole, a song you wrote, and what "fair use/dealing" exceptions apply etc. etc.

So those not infringing copyright no longer need fear they're be disconnected.

Clark to take Tizard to New York « The Dim-Post

Speculation on the future career of Labour politician Judith Tizard ended today with an announcement from Helen Clark that she would be taking the ousted Auckland Central MP to the United States with her this August, when she travels to New York to take up her new job as head of the United Nations Development Program.

It had been rumoured that Tizard would stand as a Labour Party candidate in Clark’s Mt Albert electorate, return to Parliament as a list MP or even run for mayor of Auckland’s supercity. Those rumours were quashed today with the news of her departure for New York. Clark advised that she has not yet informed Tizard about her upcoming move, as the prospect of such a long journey would only frighten and confuse her. Tizard will be leaving a month before Clark, as US Department of Agriculture regulations state that Tizard - who was Minister of Auckland, as well as Associate Minister for Arts and Transport - must spend at least a month in quarantine before she can enter the US.

In New Zealand we like to think we live in a democracy, with elected members of parliament who do the will of the people, and listen to experts in their subject matter before passing laws.

so, how are laws made in New Zealand?

There's an overview at Parliament.govt.nz on how laws are made. The key steps are:

• Introduction
• First reading
• Select committee
• Second reading
• Committee of the whole House
• Third reading
• Royal assent.

4 December 2006: Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill was introduced to house on
12 December 2006: first reading
Referred to Commerce Committee
9 March 2007: Select committee submissions due

Transcript of select committee from hansard

During select committee stage, the draconian "Guilt By Accusation" & Internet disconnection was removed. (That's all of section 92).

The Bill moved from Select Committee, and went back to the house for voting.

With only four days until the Guilt Upon Accusation law, Section 92A of the Copyright Act, is due to come into force the Creative Freedom Foundation (CFF) are highlighting statistics that paint a picture of what New Zealanders may face if the Government allows this law.

Statistics emerge around the Guilt Upon Accusation Law.. With only four days until the Guilt Upon Accusation law, Section 92A of the Copyright Act, is due to come into force the Creative Freedom Foundation (CFF) are highlighting statistics that paint a picture of what New Zealanders may face if the Government allows this law.

S92A was championed by former Labour MP Judith Tizard as a law that would cut off the internet of those "who might be breaking the law" without any due process – effectively removing New Zealander's fundamental right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty. Prime Minister John Key has aptly called this law "draconian".

who has spoken in favour of section 92?
Recording Industry Association of New Zealand
United Video
NZFACT (NZ wing of the Motion Picture Association)
Sky Television
Chris Hocquard (Entertainment Industry Lawyer)
Judith Tizardh

who has spoken against section 92?
NZ Librarian Association
NZ Law Society
John Key (prime minister of NZ)
Yulia (vocalist)
Glyn MacLean (Pianist and Keyboardist who works as a TV & Film Composer & Singer )
Luke Buda (Phoenix Foundation)
Peter Dunne (MP, UnitedFuture),
Rodney Hide (Cabinet minster)
Political parties: Green Party, Maori party, United Future, Act Party, Alliance.
Luke Rowell (Musican Disasteradio)
Imon Star (musician aka Olmecha Supreme)
google (some kind of search engine website)
Nathan Torkington (author)
Colin Jackson (regular radio broadcast columnist on national radio)

Amusing observation by Simon Power at question time today:

I find the Labour Party’s position on this issue rather confusing. The member wants to keep section 92A but amend it; the former Minister, Judith Tizard, said that it should come into force as it is, explaining that it was left deliberately vague as “at no stage did I think … I had the answer to the process”; and the Labour candidate for Hunua, Mr Jordan Carter, is the contact for yesterday’s press release from InternetNZ that said that section 92A should be dumped. Maybe Labour needs its own code of practice.

Chance of copyright solution 'fluffed' - New Zealand's source for technology news on Stuff.co.nz

Judith Tizard sez:

"It is not going to get us any further forward. While I understand the concern of internet users who think that their rights to free music and free films are threatened, the right is not to steal New Zealand music and film makers' work. The right to use the internet is a vital one, but libraries can provide it."

  The expected implementation of the law is: ISPs will disconnect apon accusation by a small group of rights holders.

Tizard still reckons we're protesting because we're criminals.

The blackout protest had nothing to do with any "right to free music" - it was the right to impartial review, evidence requirements, and, to a lesser extent, privacy.    

Dunne: Repeal ‘guilt by accusation’ internet piracy law | United FutureSource: www.unitedfuture.org.nz“All of us who brought in this Act last year believed we were protecting artists from piracy and illegal downloads. However, it is now clear that we have a situation where internet users are vulnerable to the mere accusation of piracy, and that is simply neither fair nor just,” Mr Dunne said.

“In...    United Future declares that section 92a needs to be repealed and suggests a three to six month timespan to fix this draconian law    

once apon a time, about 3 years ago, i was accused of copyright infringement.

It was a photo, posted to flickr long ago, and used in my blog. It was a photo i took of my chocolate milkshake, out at "The Bach" near island bay.

Here's the photo:

Some random from the intarwebs left comment after comment on this blog saying "You stole my photo". It was complete buillshit. They also started emailing my webhost, repeatedly accusing me of copyright infringement. My webhost dutifully forwarded these to me, i replied it was all complete bollocks.. we moved on.

fast forward to November 2008 - what's an ISP supposed to do under this circumstance? I'd call their claim "unreasonable", but i dislike the idea that my ISP is the judge and adjudicator.

Consider this advice from NZ's Ministry of Economic Development:

What should a copyright owner do if they discover a New Zealand website contains material that infringes his or her copyright?

Section 92A - "cut off anyone who *might* be breaking the law" | TheyWorkForYou.co.nz blogSource: blog.theyworkforyou....Minister Judith Tizard says: "yes it is easier for ISPs, Internet Service Providers, to cut off anyone who might be breaking the law, um, but you know, you can go to a library and use the Internet... "

Computerworld > Judith Tizard meets with copyright expert Lawrence LessigSource: computerworld.co.nzMinister of Commerce receives briefing on copyright in the digital age

Ministers call for end to fear mongering over copyright changes | coffee.geek.nzSource: coffee.geek.nzAssociate Minister of commerce, Judith Tizard, in an official press release says there is no truth in th

Associate Minister of commerce, Judith Tizard, in an official press release says there is no truth in the claim you can be cut off by your ISP based only on an accusation.

Judith Tizard today responded to alarmist claims made by a small group of IT commentators in the media that recent amendments to the Copyright Act would have ISPs cutting off the accounts of their users based on unsubstantiated accusations of copyright infringement.

"This is quiet simply untrue, and I am sure they know it," Judith Tizard said.

Computerworld > Websites threatened by new Copyright ActSource: computerworld.co.nzAssociate Commerce Minister Judith Tizard says, however, that ISPs are in a unique position to be able to control

Amongst the debate over New Zealand's Copyright act, it was reported that Judith Tizard "yelled" at the Internet Industry representatives who met with her.

Copyright Act - Simply Wrong (Updated) | The New Zealand Open Source SocietySource: nzoss.org.nzIt is clear to me that Minister Tizard simply does not understand these issues as they relate both to IT and to artistic endeavour. Nor does she seem to understand the chilling scope for private and state censorship that she has just introduced.

New Zealand has a new Copyright Act, that goes into effect on 28th February 2009

In amongst the act is section 92a: ISPs are required to disconnect those accussed of copyright infringement. This was worrying, and during select committee discussion this was modified to have penalties when the accuser turns out to be wrong. (see Controversial copyright clause to be amended computerworld.co.nz)

At the last minute the penalties for wrong accusations was removed. So, the copyright act passed, with section 92a allowing copyright holders to accuse anyone of infringement, without requiring proof - and ISPs are forced to comply and disconnect service. You don't get a trial, you're just cut off and no more internet for you.

No more email, no booking airlines, no more buying books on the internet - you're cut off based only on an accusation. If they decided to accuse me, I would not be able to continue my occupation as an Open Source programmer / gadget wrangler. I'd have to give up and probably retrain as a barrista.

This is New Zealand law. You can't make this shit up!