title: Copyright Law in New Zealand:  Should We Adopt Fair Use?

authors: Greer, Shelley Elizabeth

subjects: copyright

abstract: Copyright exceptions limit the rights of copyright owners to control the reproduction, distribution, performance and display of their works.  Fair use and fair dealing are models of statutory copyright exceptions that developed from the same body of common law in the United Kingdom.  Fair use is found in the United States of America and several other jurisdictions.  It involves an assessment of the fairness of the use of a copyrighted work and is characterised by its inherent flexibility.  Fair dealing is found in a number of Commonwealth jurisdictions, including New Zealand, and also involves an assessment of the fairness of the use.  However, in order for a use to constitute a fair dealing, the use must first fall within the scope of certain enumerated purposes.  Accordingly, fair dealing is more restrictive than fair use, less able to adapt to new technologies and is more likely to limit uses of copyrighted works that do not harm copyright owner’s markets.  In response to rapid advances in digital technology a number of fair dealing jurisdictions have recently expanded their copyright exceptions with some, such as Australia and Ireland, recommending the adoption of fair use.   The advantages of fair use are numerous and extensive.  These advantages include that fair use promotes the objective of copyright, is flexible and technology neutral, is sufficiently certain, aligns with public expectations and uses of copyright and complies with international treaties and trade agreements.  Accordingly, this paper argues that New Zealand should adopt a fair use exception into its copyright law.

text: Copyright Law in New Zealand:  Should We Adopt Fair Use? Copyright exceptions limit the rights of copyright owners to control the reproduction, distribution, performance and display of their works.  Fair use and fair dealing are models of statutory copyright exceptions that developed from the same body of common law in the United Kingdom.  Fair use is found in the United States of America and several other jurisdictions.  It involves an assessment of the fairness of the use of a copyrighted work and is characterised by its inherent flexibility.  Fair dealing is found in a number of Commonwealth jurisdictions, including New Zealand, and also involves an assessment of the fairness of the use.  However, in order for a use to constitute a fair dealing, the use must first fall within the scope of certain enumerated purposes.  Accordingly, fair dealing is more restrictive than fair use, less able to adapt to new technologies and is more likely to limit uses of copyrighted works that do not harm copyright owner’s markets.  In response to rapid advances in digital technology a number of fair dealing jurisdictions have recently expanded their copyright exceptions with some, such as Australia and Ireland, recommending the adoption of fair use.   The advantages of fair use are numerous and extensive.  These advantages include that fair use promotes the objective of copyright, is flexible and technology neutral, is sufficiently certain, aligns with public expectations and uses of copyright and complies with international treaties and trade agreements.  Accordingly, this paper argues that New Zealand should adopt a fair use exception into its copyright law.

year: 2016

title: Exceptional zeros of p-adic L-functions over non-abelian extensions

authors: Delbourgo, Daniel

abstract: Suppose E is an elliptic curve over , and p > 3 is a split multiplicative prime for E. Let q = p be an auxiliary prime, and fix an integer m coprime to pq. We prove the generalised Mazur–Tate–Teitelbaum conjecture for E at the prime p, over number fields K ⊂ μq∞ , q∞√m such that p remains inert in K ∩ (μq∞ ) +. The proof makes use of an improved p-adic L-function, which can be associated to the Rankin convolution of two Hilbert modular forms of unequal parallel weight.

text: Exceptional zeros of p-adic L-functions over non-abelian extensions Suppose E is an elliptic curve over , and p > 3 is a split multiplicative prime for E. Let q = p be an auxiliary prime, and fix an integer m coprime to pq. We prove the generalised Mazur–Tate–Teitelbaum conjecture for E at the prime p, over number fields K ⊂ μq∞ , q∞√m such that p remains inert in K ∩ (μq∞ ) +. The proof makes use of an improved p-adic L-function, which can be associated to the Rankin convolution of two Hilbert modular forms of unequal parallel weight.

year: 2014

title: New Zealand’s Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) model undermines Maori research

authors: Roa, Tom

subjects: Performance Based Research Funding

abstract: The Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) model was instigated in 2002 to increase “the quality of research through peer assessment and performance indicators” in New Zealand (Ministry of Education 2002: 17). It is used to allocate funding between universities, departments and researchers according to the putative quality and quantity of their research outputs over the preceding 6 years. PBRF is expected to incentivise improved research excellence and efficiency, and allow government to invest research funds where greatest returns will result. This is potentially a huge gain for Māori. However, “by changing the conditions of knowledge production, research assessment exercises may also alter the shape and direction of disciplines by diverting and channelling researchers’ intellectual attention and political engagement, influencing what they study, how they do it, and how they report and write” (Middleton 2009: 194). Indeed, universities repeatedly encourage researchers to focus on activities that will improve their PBRF rankings. We believe that an unintended consequence of PBRF is the creation of significant barriers to increasing the volume, scope and quality of environmental research for Māori.

text: New Zealand’s Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) model undermines Maori research The Performance Based Research Funding (PBRF) model was instigated in 2002 to increase “the quality of research through peer assessment and performance indicators” in New Zealand (Ministry of Education 2002: 17). It is used to allocate funding between universities, departments and researchers according to the putative quality and quantity of their research outputs over the preceding 6 years. PBRF is expected to incentivise improved research excellence and efficiency, and allow government to invest research funds where greatest returns will result. This is potentially a huge gain for Māori. However, “by changing the conditions of knowledge production, research assessment exercises may also alter the shape and direction of disciplines by diverting and channelling researchers’ intellectual attention and political engagement, influencing what they study, how they do it, and how they report and write” (Middleton 2009: 194). Indeed, universities repeatedly encourage researchers to focus on activities that will improve their PBRF rankings. We believe that an unintended consequence of PBRF is the creation of significant barriers to increasing the volume, scope and quality of environmental research for Māori.

year: 2009