Robertson Grant: Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Robertson Grant: Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10432] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise and speak on this bill the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill and I will join in the love fest when it comes to Simon Power and his role in bringing this bill to the House. I think that the Minister deserves credit for having drawn together the work that has gone into bringing this bill forward. 
As other speakers have noted this bill has widespread support among those who are interested in this issue. That says quite something because it was clear during the debate on section 92A of the Copyright Act that there was a great diversity of opinion and some of it was very strongly expressed. I will briefly go back to section 92A. Although that section became extremely controversial it was based on the belief that the issue of addressing copyright infringement and copyright abuse is important and that there needed to be serious consequences for those who infringe copyright. The section was also based on the view that we could come to a negotiated solution on this issue. 
On that note I credit the role of the Telecommunication Carriers Forum and Ralph Chivers from that group. He is no longer with it; he works for another large telecommunications organisation now. Mr Chivers and his group attempted to bring together some consensus on this issue. 
A lot of people were involved in that process—the rights holders the Internet service providers and the consumer representatives—and significant progress was made towards a negotiated solution. What happened however was that people became very concerned obviously about the issue of the termination of accounts and in the end it was not possible to come to an agreement. Taken away from the pressure of that negotiation taken out and put into a different process—which as I said Mr Power has led—a process has now been agreed on and that is a good thing. 
But I think the goal of section 92A is the goal that people have been speaking about today. People right across New Zealand want to make sure that our artists and musicians have the ability to make money from their craft and to know that a regime is in place whereby people who abuse that will be brought to account. On the other side of the coin those who use the Internet—which is as many people have said today a brave new world that we cannot control in the way that we may have been able to control other platforms in the past—need to be able to know that their rights will be protected as well. I think credit is due to all of the stakeholders who have been involved in this process up until now. 
A number of people have already spoken about what the bill does. I think it is important to note that there is a “three strikes” or three warnings process which includes a detection notice followed by a warning notice should the Internet subscriber be accused of infringing copyright again. I think that those two notices are very important because one of the most important parts of this bill is the notion of educating people who are involved in illegal file-sharing. It is quite clear—Mr Gareth Hughes and others have spoken about it—that a whole generation of people who do this are not even aware that what they are doing is illegal. There is a generation of people for whom if something is on the Internet it is theirs. They think that if it is there then they can use it. We need to work very hard to build up the education of particularly people of a younger age about the fact that that material belongs to somebody. It ensures the livelihood of our musicians and artists. When those Internet subscribers are going after and trying to find the work of the people whose work they appreciate so much it is important that they understand that point. I think that a three-stage process is a useful way of doing that. 
The third stage of the process is the enforcement notice which as others have said could see people being fined up to $15000 or having their Internet account disconnected for up to 6 months. The process now also includes the ability for those who have been accused and who feel that that charge is unjust to go to the Copyright Tribunal at no cost. That is important as well. That is the second set of rights I was talking about earlier. We need to protect the rights of not only those who hold the copyright but also those who perhaps feel that they have been unfairly targeted. I think that is a good balance. 
As previous Labour speakers have said our point of view is that we have concerns about the disconnection provisions. I will not go back into all the details of those concerns but I think that there will be a number of submissions on that matter at the select committee. People are particularly concerned about what it would mean. My particular concern about it is that it will not work in terms of discouraging people from illegal file-sharing because as a number of other speakers have noted people will simply go and sign up to another account. Many people have multiple accounts already. That is simply the nature of how people use and access the Internet. 
I think we want to work towards mechanisms that will actually work in terms of discouraging people from illegal file-sharing. I think that education notices and a process where people will see the consequences coming towards them will stop people at different stages of that process. The reality is that some people and perhaps some organisations will not stop because this sort of file sharing is what they do. It is illegal it is criminal activity and we will have to continue to look for and follow up those people in other ways. 
What I want to make clear and to lay down on the record is Labour’s support for the music and creative industries in New Zealand. I think that anyone looking back on the record of the fifth Labour Government would have to acknowledge that Labour did a great deal to enhance the ability of musicians and artists in New Zealand to make a living. Last night we had the 21st birthday function for New Zealand On Air in the Banquet Hall of the Beehive and the graph went up on the screen of the amount of New Zealand music being played on commercial radio. That amount is 20 percent and it has been around the 20 percent figure consistently for the last few years. That is a direct result of the code of practice that was brought in between commercial radio and the Government under the fifth Labour Government. That was an important part of ensuring that that music is heard. 
Also important was the creation of the New Zealand Music Industry Commission which has helped to promote New Zealand musicians overseas. It has given New Zealand musicians the ability to break into new markets and to make sure that their product is heard across the world. The ongoing work of the cultural recovery package that Helen Clark oversaw when it came in has also been important. Those initiatives have all contributed to New Zealand musicians and artists being able to make their way in the world. 
Labour stands beside New Zealand musicians and artists. In terms of copyright we stand beside them in acknowledging that copyright is the means by which creators such as composers and songwriters make a living from their work. We will stand up and protect that right and the enforcement of that right. The legislation that is in front of us today will help with that. We certainly have concerns about the legislation but it will help with that. What we have to do is to provide a mechanism that works—a mechanism that will discourage people from file sharing. We need to ensure that we work on the measures in this bill that will work and as I say we have concerns about whether the disconnection process will actually work. 
I will not delay the House much more. I note that we have a couple of other concerns about the bill. In particular we are concerned about the fact that many of the details within this bill are left to regulations. I draw members’ attention to Part 2 particularly the provisions of clause 10 “Regulations”. There is a lot of confusion about what the fee that will be payable by copyright owners for applications to the tribunal will be and we need to ensure that we get a lot more specificity on that part of the bill during the select committee process. We want to make sure that there is clarity. 
I think that a good job has been done by the Minister to ensure that we have a bill we can discuss. The select committee process is now the chance for all those involved—rights holders Internet service providers and consumers—to put down any further concerns they have and to ensure that we have a law that is workable for everyone but one that in particular protects the ability of our musicians and artists to make a living from their work. That is the issue that I personally have the most interest in and those are the people whom I will be standing up for as this bill goes through the House.