You're now an ISP This law changes the definition of an ISP to be practically anyone with a shared connection or website. ISPs now include businesses, schools, libraries, government departments and any organisation that provides internet services. Odds are, you're an ISP.

Business compliance costs: Under S92A it's a practical necessity to log all connections in order to be able to corroborate any future accusations, especially for tracking employees because internet disconnection (like phone disconnection) may effectively mean firing someone along with the risks of a false dissmissal. Section 92A gives no guidance here, and it practically expects your organisation to know both data forensics and copyright law.

NZ Risk: Other countries don't have this "draconian" law (to quote John Key) so organisations may prefer offshore IT companies as they don't have to operate under these conditions.

Harms artists and harms respect for copyright: We do not condone copyright infringement or anything that takes money away fellow artists, but it's also true that poorly designed copyright laws can cause public disrespect for copyright and other artistic rights.

Thousands of artists have contacted us to speak directly against Section 92A as it asks for punishment before a trial and before evidence has been held up to court scrutiny. The widespread public understanding of S92A is already is causing a public disrespect for copyright because this law infringes on public rights. We need copyright to work but S92A is doing more harm than good. As APRA member Anthony Milas put it "if anything the public backlash sure to result from [Section 92A] will make it even more difficult to educate the public and convince lawmakers of the necessity of sensible laws to protect creators rights."

Although perhaps noble in it's intent this law is corrosive to the public trust in copyright education that the artists benefit from, and it risks undoing the social contract that underlies copyright; encouraging illegal downloads and taking money away from the creative sector.

Connect with the world: NZ Artists are using the internet to connect with the world - to distribute their work and connect with new audiences. NZ is geographically isolated and internet is increasingly becoming the primary way we engage with the rest of the world. With this law, artist - as well as everyone else - could be face being wrongly disconnected from the internet and for artists who rely on the internet, to organise for example tours or exhibitions, that could be difference securing an opportunity and losing it.

Better Alternatives There are alternatives to S92A other than new business models. The issue that some artists and large industry groups feel that the courts are beyond them (or "impractical and ridiculous" in the words of RIANZ) is obviously a problem for justice in New Zealand. If courts aren't adequate - then what has often be suggested is a specialised Copyright Court.

Reverses the presumption of innocence: Section 92A calls for punishment with internet disconnection before a trial and before any evidence has been held up to court scrutiny.

Censorship: While the target of Section 92A was probably illegal downloads of music and movies it infact covers all copyrighted material including quotes and other parts of social commentary. Associated Press (AP) say that 5 word quotes must be licensed for (US)$12.50. Groups such as the Church of Scientology have issued 4000 notices to YouTube videos, some of which were protest videos. Section 92A widens the definition of an ISP to include practically any shared internet connection, and asks thousands of untrained people to assess claims of copyright infringement and data forensics. With such a poorly designed justice system individuals should expect misuse.