Hereora Dave: Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hereora Dave: Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:646;Page:15234] 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Chair. I take the opportunity to take this call in the Committee stage of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Bill. There was one particular area that as a member of the Commerce Committee I took interest in which was the provisions relating to educational establishments how libraries could be using that material for the use of students and how those issues were formulated. 
Before I talk about that I just want to recapture some of the intentions surrounding the bill. Of course the bill is amending the Copyright Act 1994 and promotes a legal framework that guides the protection and use of copyright material. Obviously that is of major interest within Maoridom at this point in time which is watching very carefully how those protections may proceed in the future. The bill is part of a wider reform process to ensure that our intellectual property legislation is up to date relevant and takes account of international developments. It will also ensure the effective operation of the Copyright Act in the face of emerging technologies. 
The bill creates a more flexible framework for technology to operate in the Copyright Act by redefining certain terms contained in the Act to make them more technologically neutral. The main provisions of the bill address concerns regarding the scope of the definition of copying; give a copyright owner a technology-neutral right to control distribution including email peer-to-peer and other digital forms of communications; and introduce a definition of Internet service provider. There is also a range of provisions that limit Internet service provider liability for copyright infringement in appropriate circumstances. Therefore it clarifies and amends the exceptions to copyright owners’ inclusive rights particularly in relation to fair dealing library archival educational use and time shifting; updates the technologically specific language currently used; and introduces the communication right for performers so they can maintain a fair commercial return. 
I thought it was important just to revisit some of the values and principles surrounding the intention of the bill. I now move to the issue I raised earlier in terms of the new provisions relating to educational establishments. The Act provides a number of specific exemptions under certain sections for educational establishments to copy works. These provisions are currently written in technologically neutral terms and allow the permitted activities to be undertaken by digital means. Clause 24 of the bill amending section 44 is designed to clarify the conditions under which an educational establishment can supply copies of works in a digital form including restricted remote access via the Internet to authorised students with supply of copies consequent to the permitted copying. Clause 25 adds a new section 44A to enable educational establishments to basically store websites electronically for educational purposes for a limited period of time linked to the duration of a period of time for which they are relevant to the teaching of the relevant course. This exemption would enable access to Internet material that is subsequently changed or deleted and has ongoing significance for teaching purposes but the exemption would be subject to the adequate identification of the material and the course for which it is stored. 
The select committee amendment under clause 24 clarifies that copies of works in digital format made under section 44 can “be communicated to a person who is a student or other person who is to receive … or has received a lesson that relates to the work.” Ideally under clause 25 it also clarifies the conditions under which an educational establishment would be allowed to store pages from a website under the new section 44A. In particular the section was amended to make the requirement to identify the author dependent on the author’s identity being known. Often the authorship of works available on the Internet is unidentifiable. Therefore requiring authors to be identified in every case is unrealistic. Clause 25 is also amended by deleting in section 44A(1)(b)(iv) the requirement that an educational establishment must identify “the course of instruction for which material is stored;”. Such a requirement was identified by the committee as being impractical given that the website material copied may be stored for use in many courses. 
Issues raised with the new educational establishment provisions are that copyright owners would like to see clause 24 amending section 44 to add new limitations on the ability of educational establishments to copy material for educational purposes. For example they consider that section 44 should not permit the whole of a work to be copied for educational purposes. That is quite important because if that is the case then under any circumstances without a licence—furthermore where part of a work is permitted to be copied—the portions of the work that may be copied for educational purposes under this exemption should be further limited. In effect copyright owners would like schools to pay more for using works protected by copyright. That was the issue raised by some of the submitters. Conversely educational establishments would like to see the scope of section 44 expanded by removing some or all of the existing restrictions under which a work may be copied for educational purposes without a licence from copyright owners. In effect schools would like to pay less for using copyright material. 
Quite frankly the response in relation to the aim of the bill was not to review or change the existing balance between the rights of copyright owners and access for educational establishments; rather it was to ensure that this balance is maintained in a digital environment. I thought it was important just to revisit again that issue because it is important that we do not lock up our libraries and institutions into having to reduce the amount of information they can rely on to provide for our students. Kia ora.