General Discussion » RIANZ, APRA, and NZFACT press release about Section 92a

Creative Freedoms

Page: 1

Author Post
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2009
Posts: 433
We'll have a response up but I thought you'd be interested in reading this.

There are numerous jumps in logic in the press release, primarily that there is a problem and so therefore we need extraordinary powers to be able to accuse people and take down their internet without court involvement.

Again, the branding in the press release is that this is an IT vs. Art issue as they claim to speak for the "creative industries". The Creative Freedom Foundation shows that artists do not want this done in their name.

The CFF hope that RIANZ, APRA and NZFACT will realise that by pushing for these laws they will bring false accusations to New Zealand.

The press release is, er, interesting... and so although it might be tempting please keep the responses civil :)

Quote
Press statement re implementation of 92a of the Copyright Act
New Zealand Creative Industries welcome changes
16 January 2009

Section 92a brings an opportunity for ISPs and rights holders to work together to address the large-scale online piracy problem that is affecting creative industries in New Zealand and worldwide.

This is an urgent issue and it cannot be solved without help from ISPs.

This is not about ISPs policing the internet, it’s about ISPs responding to a high standard of evidence of infringement and illegal activity on their networks supplied by rights holders. More than anything it is about educating users. ISPs must play a role in this.
It is estimated that 19 out of every 20 music downloads is an illegal download. Between 60 -80 per cent of all internet traffic is peer-to-peer sharing of copyright infringing files. This deprives the songwriters, record artists, actors and all those who work in the creative industries the opportunity for payment for their creativity and effort to produce the songs, movies and software you enjoy.

Section 92a is intended to help address these issues.

The Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ), Australasian Performing Rights Association (APRA) and New Zealand Federation Against Copyright Theft (NZFACT) are in discussions with the Telecommunications Carriers’ Forum and ISPs to agree a code of practice for ISPs which helps them and internet users fulfil their obligations under the Copyright Act.

This industry-wide participation is needed in order to secure a level playing field for responsible ISPs. At the same time, the creative industries are changing their business models to meet the challenges and opportunities the internet provides. However there needs to be a fair chance for the creative industries to compete against the ‘free market’ of illegal downloading and file-sharing.

Significantly, all parties agree that there is a need for education of the internet user as to what is legal and what is infringing activity on the internet. Sharing copyright protected music and movies through peer-to-peer applications such as Limewire and BitTorrent is illegal as is downloading copyrighted material from Rapidshare and other online storage sites.

Evidence of those engaged in such activity will be put before the ISP and a graduated response to this illegal activity will start with the issuing of an education letter. Ultimately, if the illegal activity continues despite these warnings, the ISPs will then terminate the user’s internet account.

This graduated response safeguards user privacy as the ISP interacts directly with subscribers without the need to disclose to the rights holders their identities. Importantly, there should be no termination of the accounts of responsible businesses and organisations such as hospitals and schools as they will have responded to the first warning and prevented further infringement taking place.

Research and practice overseas and here at home, indicates that this process will be an effective deterrent and the vast majority of users will stop or prevent illegal filesharing happening over their internet connection after one or two warnings.

Campbell Smith, CEO of RIANZ, says: “We recognise that there is a need to educate users not to infringe or allow their internet connections to be used in this illegal way. A graduated response where users are warned several times will help achieve this but in the end, if they don’t stop the infringements, the sanction of termination of internet account is the likely consequence.”

Anthony Healey, Director of NZ Operations, APRA, says: “To say that creators shouldn’t get paid simply because digital technology makes sharing music (and other creative works) possible is ridiculous. ISPs must act responsibly and accept that there is some cost to the mass of data travelling their lines. Users need to be educated and understand the consequences of their actions.”

Tony Eaton, Executive Director of NZFA©T, says: “Those working in the creative industries need the protection from theft of their work and livelihood that this legislation does afford. In working closely with the internet industries we hope to achieve a reasonable and proportionate response to the problem and thereby save the future of music, movies and other creative industry.”

Notes to the editor:


Graduated response facts

Seven out of ten (72%) UK music consumers would stop illegally downloading if told to do so by their ISP. (Entertainment Media Research, 2008 )


Seven out of ten (74%) French consumers agree internet account disconnection is a better approach than fines and criminal sanctions. (IPSOS, France, May 2008 )


Eight out of ten (82%) American teenagers familiar with the law think sanctions for illegal downloading are appropriate; 57 per cent of those unfamiliar with the law agree. (KRC US, January 2008 )


90 per cent of consumers would stop illegally file-sharing after two warnings from their ISP. (IPSOS, France, May 2008 )

70% of New Zealand respondents aged 15 - 30 to would stop downloading movies from file-sharing programs or other illegal online sources if their internet connection could be suspended or terminated by their Internet Service Provider. (NZFACT, 2008 )

Effect of piracy in UK and NZ facts

Estimates on the economic and employment damage caused by piracy vary. In the UK, Jupiter Research valued the loss at £180 million in 2008, with a cumulative loss to the industry of £1.1 billion by 2012 if nothing is done to address the problem. (IFPI 2009 Digital Music Report)

Internet piracy via P2P file-sharing networks is a significant concern and accounts for the majority of New Zealand movie industry losses – an estimated NZ.1 million in lost consumer spending in 2005. (NZFACT)


“Independent estimates suggest up to 80 per cent of internet traffic is generated by P2P file distribution, the vast bulk of which is unauthorised use of copyrighted music and movies.” (IFPI Digital Music Report 2008 )
« Last edit by Matthew Holloway on Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:11 am. »
Member
Registered: Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Education yes, persecution no. What the recording industry can't seem to get its head around is that measures like this DON'T WORK. Shutting down Napster did not bring back the days of easy money and neither will this. Those days are over. Stop whingeing about it and find a new business model.

Why will this not work? Because every attempt to restrict file sharing simply sparks a new development in technology. Where do you think BitTorrent and Limewire came from? These are a direct result of the closing down of sites like Napster.

Even if New Zealand ISPs are turned into internet police, all this will accomplish is accelerated development of Torpark-like anonymous networks with encrypted connections from the user that can't be analysed by the ISP's packet sniffer. The problem doesn't get solved, it merely gets displaced while the industry (as opposed to the actual creative artists) continues its inexorable slide into well-deserved bankruptcy.
Member
Registered: Jan 2009
Posts: 2
Here's the problem as I see it with this whole thing: In the old days pre-internet, people used to tape their favorite songs of the radio as they waited for the stations to play their requests.
Then they shared this with their friends. Thus creating a fanbase for the musicians.
Then came tape players. Then people bought a tape or cd and record it onto a tape for their friends to listen to. This created a bigger fanbase as the whole cd or album or tape was able to be shared.
Then came the internet and we were able to here bands and see films we didn't even know existed.
Then came MP3 players and we were able to share these interesting finds with friends.

This then created a huge fuss with their record industry. And so they blamed file sharing as the cause.

But they forgot that it was these tape, cd & filesharing that created feeds the very music and film community.

Over the years, I must have spent thousands of $$ of cds, tapes and records because the original is always better than the copy. And many like me have as well... Filesharing is just another way of finding out what is good and what is bad.
Does anyone remember the disappointment in buying the The Power of Snap and finding that the hit single 'SNAP', -the 90s hit single wasn't even on it! (thats $20 I will never get back).

And then what about waiting 1 year to watch that movie on VHS, you missed course it only showed for a week in the theater and you were away camping.

Filesharing on the internet created the biggest fanbase prior to its release of TV of 'Heroes' Without filesharing this show would have taken a whole year to create the fanbase it got in a month online!

If our government buckles to the legislation then we will soon find that artist like myself and my friends will not be able to get the work out there incase some kid prints it out and shows my image to their friend.
The fear only of persecution will stop the discovery of new arts and creatives.

I for one wholeheartedly stand against this legislation and the backlash that that will bring if this legislation is passed.

Page: 1

This forum uses UseBB software