Hon JUDITH TIZARD (Associate Minister of Commerce)
: I move,
That the Copyright (New Technologies and Performers’ Rights) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I will move that this bill be referred to the Commerce Committee.
This bill amends the Copyright Act 1994. It is part of a wider reform process to ensure that our intellectual property legislation is up to date, relevant, and takes account of international developments. A robust intellectual property rights system is essential for the continuing growth of New Zealand’s creative and innovative sectors. Intellectual property plays a major role in moving towards a knowledge-based economy, and in supporting research and development. It also minimises regulatory barriers to innovation.
Digital technology provides significant opportunities for the creators, for the owners, and for the users of copyright material, as well as offering them potential risks. It allows copyright works to be copied, manipulated, and disseminated with minimal effort, cost, or reduction in quality. Digital technology can also be used to protect copyright by preventing the copying of, or access to, material, and by allowing checking for plagiarism or unlawful copying.
The purpose of the bill is to ensure that the Copyright Act takes into account the impact of new technology, while maintaining a careful balance between the often competing interests of creators, owners, and users of copyright works. It also seeks to create a more technology-neutral framework for New Zealand’s law.
The bill also considers international developments in copyrights, and incorporates many aspects of two treaties negotiated by the World Intellectual Property Organization.
That organisation’s Copyright Treaty and Performers and Phonograms Treaty seek to update international copyright standards to take account of developments in digital technologies. All of the amendments introduced by this bill will be fully reviewed within 5 years in order to ensure that they operate effectively and continue to be appropriate.
The key provisions of this bill include provisions that address concerns regarding the scope of the definition of copying. It has been amended to clearly apply to digital copying of works in all forms. But copying is central to the legitimate operation of digital technology; computers, e-mail services, DVD players, and even the anti-skip functions on a portable CD player all work by making temporary or permanent copies of material. The status of those copies, which are technically covered by the Copyright Act, has been unclear, so the bill amends the Act to introduce limited exceptions for transient copying in certain circumstances. The copying that automatically takes place in the operation of a computer or communications system will not amount to an infringement of copyright.
In a digital world of almost instant communication, the ability to control communication of copyright works is as significant as the ability to control copying. Control over communication is necessary to encourage investment in efficient online distribution methods and new business models demanded by consumers. The increasing popularity of legitimate online music services, such as
CokeTunes,
digiRAMA, or Amplifier, shows that digital distribution of copyright works is becoming core to the developments in the creative industries. The bill therefore replaces the copyright owner’s existing technology-specific rights to control distribution through broadcasting and cable programme services with a technology-neutral right that applies to all forms of communication of copyright works in public. This will permit email, peer-to-peer file sharing, and other digital forms of communication.
Consistent with the technology-neutral communication right, the bill provides copyright protection for all communication works—for example, transmission via the Internet, not just the signals that carry content in broadcasts and cable programmes. The bill also repeals the exemption for cable programme services to retransmit free-to-air broadcasts without the permission of the broadcaster.
Copying is a central function of the Internet, and is central to the services provided by Internet service providers. Material must be reproduced at many stages during the course of transmission, so it may be virtually impossible to identify when and where many of those copies are made. Where the material being copied is subject to copyright protection, an Internet service provider could potentially face liability for copyright infringement by its subscribers. It is in the public interest to ensure cost-effective access to the Internet, which may be affected by this uncertain or increased liability for Internet service providers. Consistent with changes in other countries, the bill introduces a definition of Internet service provider, and a range of provisions that limit Internet service providers’ liability for copyright infringement in appropriate circumstances. They will not be liable where they are merely providing the physical facilities to enable a communication to take place.
The bill also limits the liability of Internet service providers where a provider stores infringing copyright material on its server but does not know or have reason to believe that the material is infringing, and acts within a reasonable time to delete it or to prevent access to it as soon as it is aware of the infringement.
