Coddington Deborah: Copyright (Parallel Importation of Films and Onus of Proof) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Coddington Deborah: 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:9412] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT) 
: 
 The ACT party opposes this bill. It is just a pay-off to the Prime Minister’s supporters in the arts and it is also a feeble attempt to appease American interests. In 1999 in the Speech from the Throne the Prime Minister included a statement that parallel importing of CDs videos films books and software was to be prohibited for 2 years after the first release. As we have already heard the Ministry of Economic Development conducted a review because of this. It was claimed that this review was announced because plans to ban parallel importation had secured New Zealand’s removal from the United States Special 301 Watch List for nations with as the US said inadequate copyright protection laws. 
As I have already said this bill is not about protecting copyright. Copyright is an intellectual property right and the ACT party protects property rights probably more than any other party in this House and intellectual property is no different. But this is about protecting the licensing rights of certain distribution companies and it is about protecting the market for theatre companies throughout New Zealand. This legislation will do more to promote the breaching of copyright than if there were no law protecting copyright at all. 
As the bill states the ban on parallel importing was this Government’s warped attempt to try to promote New Zealand’s creative industries. The Minister stood up before and said that it heard submissions from rural and provincial theatre companies that were not doing well in the market and that needed protection from the Government and she said that they were struggling to survive. So this Government has brought in legislation to protect rural and provincial theatres. What is this Government doing to protect rural and provincial schools that are being closed down in an unprecedented way around this country? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Would the member please come to the bill. 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON 
: Yes I will return to the bill but I just ask the Government to think about this. Does this Government consider only the friends of Judith Tizard in the film distribution business when it thinks of creative industries? Is the knowledge wave economy not something to do with creative industries? This bill is ostensibly to protect creative industries. 
I would also ask that the Minister stop and think what this legislation will do to the local New Zealand music industry which I would argue is one of the best in the world. We have in this country some of the best songwriters and musicians in the world and when I was in Cambridge earlier this year I was proud to take New Zealand CDs with me. But this bill will create monopolies and protect those who have lobbied hardest at Government level to ban parallel importing. Where will this drive consumers who do not want to pay inflated prices for their CDs? It will drive them to the Internet. It will promote the piracy and the burning. Worldwide music sales are down and the major reason is CD piracy. Modern computer technology makes it very easy to copy music and young people think it is normal to get free music downloads off the Internet. They are actually growing up now to think it is normal to breach the copyright of music and to burn CDs. They do not even think of it as pirating. Many of these people copy for personal gain which is a breach of copyright and then they go further and sell pirated CDs at school gigs markets and universities. 
If one needs any further proof of what a parallel importing ban will do to the music industry look no further than the well-publicised trial in America where Napster was taken to court by Metallica—the hard-rock music band—which along with the rest of the music industry was screaming blue murder over copyright infringement. Napster argued that it was only providing a forum for music swaps and thus not infringing copyright. How will this bill protect this dubious practice from happening? It will not. The Internet drills holes through international boundaries and this legislation is a 1950s solution forced on to New Zealanders who are no longer locked up behind the Government’s patrolled fences. 
New Zealand is not on the US Special 301 Watch List because its copyright laws are poor but because overseas copyright owners and the local exclusive licensees were placed by the parallel importing allowances in the same position as New Zealand originators of unique or branded material. That is they had to enforce their rights themselves. In other words the US copyright holders lost their free New Zealand - supplied enforcement service at the borders of this country—the New Zealand Customs Service. The Minister argued that customs would not be involved in this at all and argued that there would be no onus on customs officers to view what is coming in to see whether it will breach this legislation when it is passed. 
 If that is the case why are we passing the legislation and who will enforce it? I see that the Minister cannot address that question any more but what is the point of going through the farce of passing this legislation if it will not be enforced? All it will do is raise the uncertainty and doubt in the minds of people who are not breaking the law and then when they find that they have to try to defend themselves the onus of proof is reversed so that they are guilty until proven innocent. 
So this Government will give our American friends free protection of their licensed rights their exclusive licensees free protection. It will protect their copyright because they will not be required to do it any more—not for 9 months anyway. It will also give a guaranteed protected monopoly market until a film DVD or piece of music is no longer in high demand. I have already said that the people who will be worst affected by this legislation are the people the Labour Party used to count on as its supporters. It will be the people who cannot afford to take six children to the movies to see  
Finding Nemo 
 when it is first released who would have been able to rent it from the local Video Ezy but will no longer be able to do that. 
How far behind this bill will the print publishing industry be? Will the Government now move to ban the parallel importing of books? How will it control that industry as the print-on-demand book technology develops? The Warehouse has benefited thousands of New Zealanders by being able to offer books at a fraction of the price the big book chains demand. The Government has said that it has backed off books including books in this bill “for the time being”. I would say to the people out there who enjoy reading books to be very afraid. There is some weird belief that this bill will encourage an increase in international investment in and overseas promotion of New Zealand creative talent. The biggest barrier to investment in New Zealand creative talent in this country is the fact that the Government especially in the film industry and the New Zealand Film Commission scares away investment by behaving like some sort of commissar of culture in a studio. 
I finish by saying that parallel importing has benefited all consumers at the expense of a few monopoly-licence holders. Consumers will suffer as a result of this bill and we do not support it.