The Creative Freedom Foundation were among 6 international groups interviewed in Winning the Web: a report just released from the Open Society Institute. The report “examined 6 successful campaigns for intellectual property reform, in Brazil, Canada, the US, France, New Zealand, and the UK. [...] Legal reform is presented with two separate challenges. The first is a small but vocal minority of entrenched corporate interests – the rightsholder lobby. Wedded to business models that pre-date the age of networked digital technology, they exploit their position as incumbents to influence legislators. Often representing the world’s biggest multinational corporations, they hijack a narrative that belongs to poor artists [...] The self-interest behind this practice is masked by a flawed orthodoxy that is rarely backed up by evidence – that more intellectual property provision is always good for economic growth” The report was written by Becky Hogge, former Executive Director of the Open Rights Group.

This week has seen the s92A review under criticism for not reviewing one of the most contentious issues: that of internet disconnection rather than targeted fines. The reasons against internet disconnection are numerous , and ISPANZ President Jamie Baddeley says terminating Internet accounts to address copyright infringement is a fundamentally flawed approach, “It is a crude instrument with a shotgun-like approach that will not address the majority of offenses. We would expect that addressing this issue and finding an alternative solution is the first order of business.. Labour’s Clare Curran wrote “I don’t want to pre-empt that process. But to be frank it doesn’t look promising. [...] Terminating internet accounts is a major point of contention. Financial penalties would likely be more effective”. Finally Kiwiblog says “What would be useful is for the Government to clearly state that they are open to solutions that do not involved termination of Internet accounts.”

This years ADA symposium is in Wellington from June 26-28th and the CFF will be there. Join Bronwyn Holloway-Smith and Matthew Holloway for an introduction to the weird, wonderful, and confusing world of copyright: its history, how it works in NZ and internationally, how it is changing, and what this means for artists, educators, and other producers and users of copyrighted works. This workshop will dispel some of the myths surrounding copyright in NZ and facilitate discussion in the eternal hope of finding that elusive balance between public and private rights to that which is copyable.

Chris Knox
As most of you know by now kiwi music legend Chris Knox suffered a major stroke on Thursday but is now “able to drink water and answer basic questions while being taken to hospital” He’s in a stable condition in Auckland Hospital’s stroke unit and the news is that “doctors were anticipating that Knox would at best be in a wheelchair for the rest of his life”. You can follow his progress on a blog set up by family and friends titled the “Chris Knox had a stroke and everyone wants to know how he is, how the hell are we gonna keep you all updated all at once blog”. Get well soon, fella!

InternetNZ call Guilt Upon Accusation law review a “broken remedy”
Stuff.co.nz reports that InternetNZ have come out against internet disconnection as a form of punishment, “The concerns we have are that it looks like it’s a pretty quick process and it looks like they are trying to find a better way to do the termination remedy when feedback from the public and the majority of submissions indicated that it’s termination that’s the problem.” The Creative Freedom Foundation share similar concerns. One of the key issues with s92A was its potential to punish innocent people for the actions of others the s92A review expresses a preference for disconnection, saying that a “guiding principle” of the review is for the “process leading to account termination” to be clear. Fines would be much more appropriate.
There are many alternatives to disconnection, for example royalties or fines. Fines are more targeted than disconnection – punishing the guilty person, but not innocent people who happen to share the connection, and obviously this should be of concern to anyone with a shared internet connection. For artists, royalties or fines have the potential to include payment for copyright infringement, whereas indirect punishments that harm innocent people will simply reflect badly on artists.
Due to New Zealand’s geograpical isolation the internet is a vital tool for connecting to the rest of the world, and is also becoming more pervasive with vital services moving online such as parts of government, health care (records, scheduling) and social interaction tools (newspapers, phone, email, social networks). Disconnection may hinder people’s ability to pay bills, operate their business or do their job, access banking, education, insurance, etc. Due to this the internet is already a necessary service like other utilities such as the phone and postal systems. With internet use showing no signs of slowing, in future years disconnection will be seen as a shortsighted and increasingly unfair penalty. Last week France moved against disconnection and joined the majority of the European Union who are against this form of penalty. What will New Zealand do?
As we are once again facing the possibility of internet disconnection as the government’s chosen punishment for infringement, the CFF strongly recommend that this inventive penalty be ruled out.

The changing relationship between artist and fan.
Billboard magazine reports that Trent Reznor has quit social networking , that “As one of the more prolific users of Twitter , blogs and other social networking constructs, Reznor, in his latest post laments the degradation of the experience” Reznor says that “It’s been an interesting experiment over the last couple of years or so. Faced with leaving the infrastructure of traditional record labels and figuring out what the right thing to do is in this new world – I found myself realizing that for me to have any concept of how to interact with the community and know what they might want / what they find appropriate, I need to immerse myself in that world and live it for a while [...] The relationship between artist and fan is changing if you haven’t noticed, along with the way we consume and experience music and even communicate since the internet arrived”

Right to Research: An Open Resource for Learning
Right to Research, a coalition of reseachers, has just launched. “Students rely on access to academic journal literature for their research and education. However, even before the recent economic crisis many colleges have struggled with the high costs of journal subscriptions, restricting access for students and scientists alike. Learning and inquiry are impeded when scholars lack access to fellow researchers’ work, and when students lack access to the work of scholars before them.” Closer to home we have WikiEducator, and their discussion of Reusable and portable content for New Zealand schools.
“At the same time, digital technologies have opened new opportunities for research. New tools facilitate faster discoveries, speed the development of new technologies, and accelerate the progress of science. Patients could have access to the latest medical research, citizens could evaluate scientific information on environmental impacts, and developing countries could apply the most recent scholarship to public health and development efforts. But access barriers leave these opportunities under-explored.”
Learn more at Right to Research.org.
Semi-related: Using Wikis for Developing, Sharing and Reusing Educational Content.

(crossposted from CreativeFreedom.org.nz)

According to a story at The Age “CAFE and restaurant patrons could soon be eating in silence, after a proposal by Australia’s largest record labels to increase the cost of background music by up to 2000 times.” … what would have cost $125/yr now costs $19,344, and small cafes have increased from $124 to $5,860. Of course buying a CD doesn’t entitle you to play it in a store as that’s called a Public Performance in Australia and New Zealand. Perhaps this will see more businesses moving to Creative Commons or CC services like Jamendo Pro. With over-inflated costs causing many businesses owners to consider cutting out the playing of background music – and subsequently artists losing out on the promotional benefits of this activity – one might wonder what impact this will have on artists, and perhaps more importantly how much of this increased revenue will actually make it back to the artists…

Hi folks, in this issue:

• S92A Returns: the Government Review and Timeline;
• Concerns over Internet Disconnection;
• French ‘Guilt Upon Accusation’ Law is Dead – for real this time;
• Call for Submissions on ACTA;
• ADA Symposium 2009 in Wellington;
• Downfall Movie Remixed into Social Commentary.

(Download newsletter as PDF, ODT)

Find us on: RSS | Myspace | Facebook | Twitter

S92A Returns: the Government Review and Timeline

When s92A was scrapped it was always said that it would be reviewed and that it was coming back. At the time Hon Simon Power said “While the government remains intent on tackling this problem, the legislation itself needs to be re-examined and reworked to address concerns held by stakeholders and the government. The government will begin a review to amend the section immediately to address areas of concern.”

The CFF have now found out that the government has formed a special Working Group of intellectual property and internet law experts and will be working with them to develop a set of proposals/questions around s92A.

The CFF has recently been asked to join a targeted group stakeholders who will provide input on the proposals/questions, and we intend to do so to ensure that your views are taken into consideration and the replacement s92 isn’t just as bad, or worse than its predecessor.

From our conversations with the government it’s fairly clear that they’re trying to make s92A work. They want to build upon the TCF code and just fill in the blanks, which will hopefully include due process. The working group are not currently guided to consider s92C, nor whether internet disconnection is appropriate alternative to fines.

We’ll keep you updated on progress, but in the meantime you can read and have your say on the government’s s92A Review Process and Timeline here >

Concerns with Internet Disconnection

Although we are remaining optimistic about the s92A review process, there are some causes for concern – particularly the apparent insistence that the punishment for copyright infringement online remains termination of internet accounts.

From where we sit, internet disconnection remains a disproportionate sanction that is increasingly viewed as unfair. The internet is becoming more pervasive with vital services moving online such as parts of government, health care (records, scheduling) and basic social interaction tools (newspapers, phone, email). Instead, we recommend fines or royalty payments. This would allow scaled, appropriate and robust sanctions.

Internet disconnection is a ‘one-size-fits all’ punishment that is increasingly viewed as unfair with the internet becoming more pervasive and services moving online. It may unfairly hinder people’s ability to pay bills, operate their business, access banking, education, insurance, communication tools, do their job, etc.

There is significant potential for innocent people to be punished:
25% of computers are infected with viruses that download, store, and distribute potentially infringing information without their owner’s knowledge*.

Many people may be punished for the actions of one and identifying the individual is currently impractical for technical reasons.

These are a few examples of the impracticality of accurate targeting. Providers of shared connections such as a large business, library, school, government department, internet cafe or hotel, may be punished for the actions of their employees, customers or even infected computers.

*OECD Report “Malicious Software (malware): a Security Threat to the Internet Economy” (2008 )

French ‘Guilt Upon Accusation’ Law is Dead (for real this time)

In breaking news, The Open Rights Group report that the French HADOPI law is dead, saying that the French Constitutional Council: “decided that presumption of innocence is more important [...] All sanctioning power (ie. disconnecting internet users) has been removed”.

Mike Masnich at Techdirt reports that the Council “has gutted the law, after finding significant constitutional problems with it. The Council specifically barred the heart of the law: the cutting people off the internet part, noting: ‘communication and liberty of expression are fundamental rights that only a judge can rule on.’” This statement echoes the findings of a recent UK government report that found that 73% of UK consumers now believe that “broadband is becoming as essential a utility as electricity or water.” More inside…

The CFF consider Internet disconnection an inappropriate sanction. Due to New Zealand’s geograpical isolation the internet is a vital tool for connecting to the rest of the world, and is also becoming more pervasive with vital services moving online such as parts of government, health care (records, scheduling) and social interaction tools (newspapers, phone, email, social networks). Disconnection may hinder people’s ability to pay bills, operate their business or do their job, access banking, education, insurance, etc. Due to this the internet is already a necessary service like other utilities such as the phone and postal systems. In future years with increasing internet use disconnection will be seen as a shortsighted and increasingly unfair penalty.

As we are once again facing the possibility of Internet disconnection as the government’s chosen punishment for infringement, the CFF strongly recommend that the inventive penalty of internet disconnection be ruled out.

More news about the decision also at ArsTechnica

Call for submissions on ACTA

Hon Simon Power has called for submissions on ACTA saying that the negotiations are now focusing on “enforcement issues in the digital environment”.

Our last newsletter contained an update on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) that the New Zealand government is currently negotiating with a number of international countries. Leaked reports indicate that ACTA may force Internet Service Providers to reveal your private information if you are accused of copyright infringement. This is comparable to forcing Telecom to reveal information on who you talk to based on nothing more than an accusation, without a warrant and without court approval or oversight. This is an unprecedented breach of privacy and due-process and it’s being proposed in the name of protecting artists.

New Zealand’s Mark Harris has been following ACTA for some time now, calling for greater transparency and for the Ministry of Economic Development to clarify their stance considering that ACTA drafts have been leaked online. ACTA may allow private companies to snoop on New Zealanders internet connections based only on accusations of copyright infringement, and for border officers to search laptops and ipods for files. Read more about ACTA, read over the previous New Zealand submissions, and have your say. The closing date for submissions is Monday 29 June 2009. Radio interview about this, inside…

Digital Village.com recently did an interview with EFF’s Eddan Katz about ACTA: part 1 (mp3), part 2 (mp3).

ADA Symposium 2009 in Wellington

Taking place in Wellington from June 26-28 2009, the 6th Aotearoa Digital Arts Symposium: Critical-Digital-Matter is shaping up to be a great weekend.

This year, the symposium sets out to examine the critical intersections between digital materials and art practice. Issues will be explored through keynote presentations, discussions, artist presentations, workshops, a screening programme, and an exhibition.

The symposium will feature a keynote presentation by internationally renowned sound and intermedia artist Phil Dadson, and a remote conversation with London-based media theorist Matthew Fuller via De Balie, the centre for Culture and Politics in Amsterdam. CFF will also facilitate a workshop on Copyright and NZ Artists.

The Aotearoa Digital Arts Trust, invites artists, researchers, curators, art enthusiasts and all those interested in critical digital material practice from Wellington and around New Zealand to participate.

Cost: $50 (waged), $30 (unwaged) – includes Enjoy opening, screening, and the ‘ADA free lunch’.

For registration and more information email symposium@aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz or visit http://symposium09.aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/

Downfall movie remixed into social commentary

Wired Magazine says that Downfall, “a critically praised but little-seen movie about the last days of Adolf Hitler is getting a new lease on life online as the basis for hundreds of satirical videos”. By simply remixing the video with new subtitles people are commenting on Copyright Takedowns, on Susan Boyle fans, and Nigerian email scams to name just a few. Just search Youtube for downfall hitler and you’ll find many more. With no New Zealand protection for parody and satire remixes however we sadly would risk copyright infringement claims by participating in this commentary.

See also:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/28/eff-chairman-makes-a.html
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2008/05/adolf-hitler-is/

Thanks,
from the Creative Freedom Foundation team

The Open Rights Group report that the French HADOPI is dead, saying that the Constitutional Council: “decided that presumption of innocence is more important [...] All sanctioning power (ie. disconnecting internet users) has been removed”. Mike Masnich at Techdirt reports that the Council “has gutted the law, after finding significant constitutional problems with it. The Council specifically barred the heart of the law: the cutting people off the internet part, noting: ‘communication and liberty of expression are fundamental rights that only a judge can rule on.’” This statement echoes the findings of a recent UK government report that found that 73% of UK consumers now believe that “broadband is becoming as essential a utility as electricity or water.”

The CFF consider Internet disconnection an inappropriate sanction. Due to New Zealand’s geograpical isolation the internet is a vital tool for connecting to the rest of the world, and is also becoming more pervasive with vital services moving online such as parts of government, health care (records, scheduling) and social interaction tools (newspapers, phone, email, social networks). Disconnection may hinder people’s ability to pay bills, operate their business or do their job, access banking, education, insurance, etc. Due to this the internet is already a necessary service like other utilities such as the phone and postal systems. In future years with increasing internet use disconnection will be seen as a shortsighted and increasingly unfair penalty.

As we are once again facing the possibility of Internet disconnection as the government’s chosen punishment for infringement, the CFF strongly recommend that the inventive penalty of internet disconnection be ruled out.

More news about the decision also at ArsTechnica

Lumiere Reader writes “Andrew Armitage, proprietor of AroVideo in Wellington, presents his case for reform of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act”. Armitage argues that, with new technologies emerging such as DVD, cable television and the internet, subsequent amendments to the Act have failed to fairly accommodate the unique properties of new formats. He further explains that “the primary reason why films are not available on DVD, and in many cases are withdrawn from the NZ market, is because the distributor cannot justify the classification costs to release the film. The cost of classifying a film in New Zealand is approx. $1100 + gst for an average feature film or DVD disc…Thus the cost of classifying the 16 discs that comprise Seasons 2-5 of The L-Word TV Series, for example, would total $17,600 + gst payable to the OFLC. The distributor of this series made a business decision not to release these titles in New Zealand.”

As we’ve seen in the success of iTunes and the Monty Python back catalogue, providing good legal availability and access alternatives is often the key to addressing the problem of illegal downloading – ultimately boosting sales. If obscurity is a bigger risk than piracy, then we hope that this problem of access to films and video in NZ as highlighted by AroVideo will be solved, and we can all finally get to rent and watch the complete Freaks and Geeks series. And maybe, maybe one day someone will figure out a way to let us legally download films and video online!?

Read more here: http://www.lumiere.net.nz/reader/item/2133

Note, Armitage states: “This forum is not concerned with censorship decisions that are made by the Classification Office (OFLC) in respect of a film’s content, and we are not anti-censorship. Our concerns are with what amounts to the “economic censorship” of legitimate filmed entertainment for mature audiences.”

(crossposted from CreativeFreedom.org.nz)

Now it’s the UKs turn for fake piracy statistics. A report commissioned by a government body called the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property claims that “Downloading costs billions,” and that “estimates as to the overall lost revenues if we include all creative industries [...] reach £10 billion and a loss of 4,000 jobs”. The only problem is that the figures were estimates from a 2004 industry press release with no scientific basis, and as shown in an article in The Guardian the claims don’t even stand up the slightest scrutiny, adding that the figures would only make sense if people spent £175 a week or £8,750 a year on CDs, movies, and TV (!). The author adds, “Now I am always suspicious of this industry, because they have produced a lot of dodgy figures over the years. I also doubt that every download is lost revenue since, for example, people who download more also buy more music”. Another article gives some obvious advice to law makers that “If people want to share content they will find another way to do it,” he said. “It is more about education and allowing people to get content easily and cheaply that will make a difference. This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive.”. Quite.

Wired Magazine says that Downfall, “a critically praised but little-seen movie about the last days of Adolf Hitler is getting a new lease on life online as the basis for hundreds of satirical videos”. By simply remixing the video with new subtitles people are commenting on Copyright Takedowns, on Susan Boyle fans, and Nigerian email scams to name just a few. Just search Youtube for downfall hitler and you’ll find many more. With no New Zealand protection for parody and satire remixes however we sadly would risk copyright infringement claims by participating in this commentary.

See also:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/28/eff-chairman-makes-a.html
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2008/05/adolf-hitler-is/