Friday 9:35am (30th January 2009)
Creative Freedom Foundation Newsletter, 30 January 2009..In this newsletter there are several stories but none are as important as the news that National's Steven Joyce and Chris Finlayson say they plan to go ahead with the Guilt Upon Accusation law Section 92A that results in punishment before a trial and before any evidence has been held up to court scrutiny. This is obviously sad news but it isn't set in stone and since the announcement the UK have completely backed away from their S92A-like law due to "impracticalities and complexities", while in New Zealand many people have urgently written letters to their MPs. UPDATE: Wanting ideas about what to write? See this discussion... or read on for the newsletter
What can you do? You can write a letter to Steven Joyce and Chris Finlayson TODAY -- this is important so keep it polite and respectful, but firm -- it's more persuasive that way. Of course this should be in your own words and it doesn't need to be a long letter. You could mention the number of people that you speak for and their interests, whether you condone copyright infringement that takes money away from artists, whether you think Section 92A is appropriate for New Zealand, and perhaps examples of alternatives such as new business models. This is urgent, have your say today.
NEWSLETTER
- Copyright changes on the horizon: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
- "UK backs down on three strikes - will sanity prevail here?"
- National announce they plan to go ahead with Section 92A
- Response to APRAs statements about the Creative Freedom Foundation
Copyright Changes On The Horizon: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
Section 92A was championed by former-minister Judith Tizard as a solution to artist copyright infringement online. The argument however needs to be more complex than 'artists vs. the internet' simply because it is more complex. Thousands of artists reject the idea that this law is an appropriate response. Already ACTA is being primed as the next big answer to copyright infringement online, and ACTA involves allowing companies to snoop on alleged copyright infringer's internet connections as part of tracking criminal networks. ACTA is still being negotiated, it's terms may change, but it raises an important question: how far should we go to enforce laws and at what expense to public rights? Although there are some people who say it's too late to do anything about Section 92A we disagree. Even if Section 92A does come into
effect on February 28th it can still be repealed, or limited, and the CFF will do what it can. I think it's important however to distinguish S92A from the copyright changes on the horizon such as ACTA.
Please remember that this is a long-term problem for everyone online, so start thinking in that kind of time scale. It's only a month after we launched and we've had an amazing response from the public, and it's great to see that thousands of artists in New Zealand are taking a stand to say: Not In My Name
For more on our long term plans read http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=62
"UK Backs Down On Three Strikes - Will Sanity Prevail Here?"
Citing the UK's recent statements against Guilt Upon Accusation laws due to "impracticalities and complexities" this NZ Herald article asks why National's Steven Joyce thinks this law is workable?: "The UK government's back-down also calls the move by the National government further into question. If the government and ISP's of one of the world's strongest economies were struggling to enforce similar laws to the proposed Section 92, it is likely that smaller New Zealand ISPs will be even more hard pressed to make the proposed laws workable." This certainly makes you wonder what gives National the confidence to allow this law to come into power despite that experts are calling it unworkable and thousands of artists say they don't want this done in their name. The CFF urge National's Steven Joyce to review the former-Labour MP Judith Tizard's law and to repeal it before February 28th.
National Announce Plan To Go Ahead With Section 92A
The new National government finally made their intentions clear: they will stick with S92A, removing New Zealander's right to due process and court trial before being found guilty. Communications and Information Technology Minister Stephen Joyce announced that the government would take no action to repeal the law: "the new "guilt by accusation" law would result in internet service providers (ISPs) being forced to take on the role of gatekeeper by [disconnecting] anyone accused of flouting copyright laws. Calls to repeal [Section 92A] have been knocked back by the Government.". With the UK backing down on their Guilt Upon Accusation laws it seems that NZ is the only one remaining willing to punish citizens before a trial and before any evidence has been held up to court scrutiny. After the 28th of February the Government can still repeal S92A and the CFF will do what it can. It's important however to distinguish S92A from the copyright changes on the horizon such as ACTA. Pushing for a fair balance in digital rights and Copyright Law in NZ will be an ongoing task, and CFF are up for the long haul. We've recently marked our 1 month anniversary, and during the past month we've had an amazing response from the public. Thousands of artists are taking a stand to say: Not In My Name. So it has begun.
Response to APRAs Statements about the Creative Freedom Foundation
Due to the complex formatting this news item is probably best viewed on our website: http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=51
