Sharples Pita: Copyright (New Technologies and  Performers' Rights) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Sharples Pita: Copyright (New Technologies and  Performers' Rights) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:7192] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 The people of Te Ati Haunui-a-Paparangi were left with the words of their tupuna Tinirau: “Toi te kupu toi te mana toi te whenua”. The proverb stresses that these three taonga—language prestige and land—are the main means of preserving Maoritanga. Without the Maori language without prestige or mana and without land Maori culture would be a thing of the past. In much the same way the comprehensive protection of matauranga Maori—Maori knowledge—is intimately linked to the notion of copyright. 
We the Maori Party welcome the opportunity for copyright reform to ensure that the critical issues associated with Maori traditional knowledge and intellectual property rights are debated. Thirteen years ago Mataatua iwi and the National Maori Congress organised an international hui from which emerged the Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The resultant declaration was tabled at the 1993 session of the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations and has since been acknowledged in a key number of international documents produced by Unesco the Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Intellectual Property Organization. 
There are three key ideas included in the Mataatua declaration. Firstly indigenous cultural heritage is site and community specific. Secondly the first and primary beneficiaries of indigenous cultural heritage are the direct descendants of that heritage. Thirdly indigenous peoples are willing to share with humanity their traditional knowledge provided ethical processes such as free and prior informed consent are protected alongside their fundamental rights to define and control this knowledge. 
The Mataatua declaration also calls on States to develop in full cooperation with the indigenous peoples a sui generis system to protect cultural and intellectual property. The concept of sui generis systems is a key principle for which we will be looking keenly to expert advisers—the people in the know—to bring their learning to bear at the select committee. The concept of sui generis is to describe new ways of doing things. Aotearoa has already introduced a sui generis measure in its Trade Marks Act 2002. In addition to the standard components of trademark law there is a provision that enables the Commissioner of Trade Marks to refuse to register a trademark if it is considered to be offensive to Maori. This is considered to be a sui generis measure a new and unique addition to the existing framework. So it can be done. Would it not be a great thing if during the process of this bill we were able to follow this lead and ensure that a new way of doing something could be followed up? 
This bill amends the Copyright Act 1994 to account for the opportunities and risks that digital technology presents for creators owners and users of copyright materials. These new techniques can be both a blessing and a burden. The burden of course accompanies the risks associated with commercial dealing of material that acts against owners’ rights. At its very essence copyright is about creators being recognised for their efforts. 
I come to this bill from a basis of over 30 years in composing and orchestrating choreography for Te Roopu Manutaki Maori culture group. My passionate belief has always been that I want to share our works of art to ensure that our taonga tuku iho continue to thrive and revitalise our culture. But I am constantly reminded particularly in the context of Te Matatini our national Maori kapahaka competitions of the significance of providing for intellectual and cultural property rights to ensure that the long-term development of Maori performance arts is protected. So I think about the world of kapahaka—festivals events exhibitions wananga workshops master classes Maori performance arts in schools the Pacific Arts Festival and international festivals and events—and about how indigenous knowledge is protected across all those arenas. There is an ongoing debate about who owns the copyrights in all those areas. Is it Te Matatini or is it the artist? I know myself that it has sometimes taken all of our efforts to get our compositions out of the archives. After all who are we? Only the authors. 
That brings me to another point which I hope will be taken up at the select committee. We seriously need to know the views of those at the coalface—or more appropriately at the easel or the floorboards—about the context of copyright in relation to new technologies and performers’ rights. The issue of performers’ rights gives us every reason to urge that tangata whenua be specifically invited to make their presence felt in this new legislation. Some in this House will recall that in 2003 Toi Maori Aotearoa at an annual hui for Maori performers raised issues about the performers’ rights review before Cabinet. Maori performers described their concerns about collective ownership of performances and protection for the underlying cultural heritage that provides source material for a variety of performances. This is particularly so in relation to respecting the cultural integrity of works once they enter the public domain. So we can do no better than turn to Maori performers to assist the Parliament in clarifying the application of existing rights and exceptions for tangata whenua in the digital environment. 
Finally I recall the korero that came out of the National Digital Forum of November 2004 at Te Papa Tongarewa. Dr Paul Reynolds raised the concept of a creative commons: a communal creative webspace in which the protection of intellectual property maintains the copyright holder’s ability to grant certain rights to the public while reserving others. I quite like this idea and I would be interested in seeing how it applied to our digital future. 
There was also specific reference to the exhibition Ka Moe Ka Puta which showcased Ngati Kahungunu photographic archives. Unlike the temporary inhabitation of a physical space an online exhibition has the advantage of creating an archive for the future. But there are also problems associated with this type of exhibition being made available online that relate to intellectual property protections in particular. Suggestions were made that a type of subscription or password entry perhaps by whakapapa could be included. 
Other issues raised included the probability of precluding human interpretation in the decontextualised atmosphere. In effect what that means is that it prevents my kuia and kaumatua from walking alongside of me describing the wealth of whakapapa connections that link to an image. These are all issues that we hope might be brought to the table when the bill comes to the select committee. 
The Maori Party will support this bill and we look forward to a fertile discussion in which we are all better informed about the means of protecting and preserving the mana and integrity of our language our words our world. 
I finish with a final inspiration from the oriori of Tuteremoana which reminds us of the importance of protecting Maori knowledge: kotahi tonu te hiringa i kake ai a Tane ki Tikitikiorangi. Ko te hiringa i te mahara. There was but one great power that enabled Tane to reach Tikitiki o Rangi. It was the power of the mind. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.