Nash Stuart: Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Nash Stuart: Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21027] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 Some quite interesting dilemmas are raised in clause 30 in which new sections 87 to 87B are substituted in the Copyright Act. We are talking here about what infringes copyright and what does not infringe copyright and there are some interesting precedents around that. New section 87 is headed “Free public playing or showing of communication work”. For example if someone plays something that is free—that is if people have not come to see a movie or hear a soundtrack—then it states in this provision that that “does not infringe any copyright in—(a) the communication work;”. For example one could have a fire truck with a stereo on the top of that fire truck. If one drove around the streets and played music then that is not an infringement of copyright in any way shape or form because no one has paid to come out specifically to hear a concert or has been led to believe that they are paying to hear any song for that matter. 
But there are some interesting precedents in relation to that and one I remember—and Mr Chair himself might remember—is that there was a National Party conference where a Muttonbirds song was played. I think it might have been  
Nature 
— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Were you there? 
STUART NASH 
: “Mr 40”! I think a good nickname for “Mr 40” might be “Rip Van Winkle” because he slept for 40 years came back and found that things had changed. Nothing has changed about “Mr 40” over there. 
Anyway I go back to my example. At a National Party conference the song  
Nature  
by the Muttonbirds was played. The lead singer Don McGlashan of the Muttonbirds came out and said—and I quote—that he would rather have sex with an ugly crayfish than have one of his songs played at a National Party conference. There was a big debate about that—about what constituted copyright. Had the National Party infringed a copyright by playing someone’s song without his permission at a gathering where people had actually paid to attend that gathering? 
I must admit that that same case came to mind when I was watching the news and saw a 3-second snippet about the last National Party conference when I think all the members were quizzing the Minister of Finance about asset sales and were disagreeing with him. A Feelers song was played and I happen to know that the Feelers were huge supporters of Helen Clark when she was Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage. I said to myself “Goodness me I wonder if the National Party stole that song or actually paid money or got permission to play it in an area where people had gathered for a specific purpose. Does that infringe copyright?”. 
I am looking through this bill but I am not too sure whether that does infringe copyright because it states in new section 87(2) inserted by clause 30: “For the purposes of this section the public playing or showing of a communication work is not free if—(a) the audience has paid for admission to—(i) the place where the communication work is played or shown … or (b) goods or services are supplied at the venue or a place of which it forms part at prices … or (c) the venue is a hotel motel camping ground … that admits persons for a fee for purposes of temporary accommodation and the audience is made up of persons residing at that hotel motel camping ground or other place.” So I was reading this and I was very unsure—perhaps the Minister of Commerce could answer—whether for example at a National Party conference the broadcasting of a song infringed copyright if the National Party had not got specific authorisation to play such a song. 
The other thing this brings up is for example if I went to a hotel to see a concert by a certain band and I paid money to get in and on a jukebox they were playing Rolling Stones songs but I had paid money to go in to hear a song played would that infringe copyright? Maybe it would not for a jukebox. I am sure there are rules around that because one puts money into it. If they had put in a CD for example and that is counted as broadcasting the Rolling Stones in a public place where people have paid to hear music does that infringe copyright? This bill is a little unclear in that area. Maybe I am not reading it correctly. That is probably the case. The Minister no doubt will be able to stand up and clarify that. The implications for this are that pubs bars hotels camping grounds etc. will need to be very very careful. 
Let me give members one example. A school in Napier does not have a bell that rings to denote the end of interval or the beginning of lunchtime; it has music. It plays music.