Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Robertson H V Ross: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9402] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member will come to the point. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: Let us just go through some of the facts in respect of this bill and why it is about denying choice for New Zealanders. We heard a speech stating that it is all about protecting small cinemas. We know that the 9-month provision applies from the first international release of the film. If the film is released in summer in Europe and is going to be released in summer in New Zealand that is 6 months of the 9 months gone already. We also know that the DVD can be imported by the owner of the copyright without any fetter by this bill. That means that Disney can import  
Finding Nemo 
 as a DVD to be sold at Disney shops but parallel importers such as the Warehouse—Mr Tindall is a good supporter of the Labour Party—will not be allowed to parallel import DVDs into the country. Disney can do it but the Warehouse cannot; so there is another anomaly there. 
I also say to United Future that significant numbers of New Zealanders like the choice of being able to rent a DVD or video of a film currently being screened. This bill will prevent them from having the opportunity to rent the DVD or video but it does not stop them from getting on the Internet and ordering and buying the DVD or video from Australia. The issue here is that only some people can afford to buy the DVD or video. They are quite expensive. As Mrs Coddington said if people have four five or six kids they are probably looking at paying between $36 and $45— 
Deborah Coddington 
: It’s $78. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: It would cost $78 in Auckland to take the kids to see  
Finding Nemo 
 as well as cost $12 to $15 for the supervising parent. People could be looking at paying $50 to $60 to take their family of four to six kids to the movies. That is really expensive and it is why a lot of people like to have the choice of whipping down to a video source and renting a DVD or video for the kids. It is all about choice and I can tell United Future that this bill denies choice to a whole lot of people. It denies them the choice of an alternative form of entertainment. 
As a form of protectionism for small cinemas it will not work. We know that people can import DVDs and videos directly off the Internet. We know that the copyright owners can import directly into New Zealand and sell through their own shops but that the Warehouse and other parallel importers cannot. We know that the provision applies 9 months after the international release which in New Zealand may be only 2 or 3 months. So the bill will just not work as a form of protectionism. 
I ask United Future to please consider the amendment that I have put forward which would allow everything else in the bill—some of the good stuff about defining copyright title and rental rights—to be left in it but would remove that foolish prohibition of 9 months. I know that the notes from the Government will not cover this matter but I am happy to give them a copy of the final Cabinet legislation committee paper on it which basically says the ban is not going to work. I bet Labour did not give that to United Future. I say that United Future should learn from the Care of Children Bill and read the stuff that the Government does not give its members because material from the Government’s own official documents shows that nothing about this prohibition is going to work. People who want to obtain  
Finding Nemo 
 on DVD will be able to do that but they will have to be people who are prosperous enough to afford it.