Faafoi KrisCOPYRIGHT (MARRAKESH TREATY IMPLEMENTATION) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingHon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): I move That the Copyright (Marrakesh Treaty Implementation) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. Madam Speaker before I start thanking others can I acknowledge you in your new role as Assistant Speaker. I'm sure you'll use your wisdom and judgment as you did as senior Government whip in your new role in the Chair. I'm more used to you calling on my name not to speak so it is nice to have the invitation from you to make a contribution tonight. Let's see how we go.I do want to thank the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee or EDSI for their work and consideration of this legislation. Jonathan Young: You're welcome. Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Very hard-working. I also want to thank all of those who took time to submit and provide insight and feedback at the select committee. This bill amends the Copyright Act to allow New Zealand to accede to the Marrakesh Treaty. A little bit of background to that treaty: it is estimated that only 10 percent of all written material that is published worldwide is published in formats that are accessible to people with a print disability and this lack of access is a barrier in public life and it also restricts employment and education and also recreational opportunities for people with print disabilities. To address this problem the World Intellectual Property Organization or WIPO concluded the Marrakesh Treaty to provide an international legal framework for an exception to copyright infringement to facilitate the production and international exchange of copyright works in accessible formats. Fifty-five countries are now party to the Marrakesh Treaty including Australia Canada Chile Singapore the United States and the European Union. The Copyright Act of 1994 already has an exception to copyright infringement that allows prescribed bodies as within this bill to make accessible-format copies without the need to seek the copyright owner's permission. However two things: first of all only a small number of organisations with limited resources are providing copies of accessible formats to a small group of persons with a print disability and secondly the current exception does not provide for the import of accessible formats of works which results in costly and time-consuming duplication in converting works to accessible formats when accessible-format copies of these works may already exist and may already be available from other countries at a much lower cost. To address these issues the bill proposes to replace section 69 of the Copyright Act with new section 69 and new section 69A through to section 69D. All submitters expressed support for the aims of the Marrakesh Treaty. However some submitters expressed differences of opinion on some aspects of this legislation. Groups representing copyright owners and authors generally argued that the conditions imposed on authorised entities by the bill might not be adequate to protect the interests of copyright owners and authors. They submitted that the bill should impose stricter conditions than those that are currently set out in the bill. Many of the concerns raised by those copyright owners and authors are also relevant to other exceptions in the Copyright Act and I consider that these are better dealt with as part of the review of the Copyright Act currently being carried out by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. Many of the other submitters argued that conditions imposed in the bill—in particular the commercial availability test—were too onerous. They submitted that these conditions may deter authorised entities from making accessible-format copies or may make it difficult for authorised entities to provide timely access to accessible-format copies. The bill was reported back from select committee with the unanimous recommendation that it be passed with amendments. Most of the amendments are minor and are intended to clarify some aspects of the bill. The most significant amendment is the removal of the commercial availability test. The select committee heard both arguments for and against the commercial availability test and decided that on balance a formal requirement for a commercial availability test would disadvantage print-disabled people disproportionately to the benefit gained by copyright holders. I agree with the recommendations in the select committee report. These recommendations stayed true to the original intent of the bill and provide greater clarity so can I thank the select committee for its work in that respect. I think it has been made a better bill as a result of the select committee process in allowing both of those sides to have that debate and I think that the select committee has landed at the right place there. So I commend this bill to the House.