The politicians are at it again.
Passing laws, the consequences of, they don't seem to have any clue about. Why they lack so much common sense is beyond the normal person. I believe part of the problem is that our debating chamber is not that - it is simply a cannon fodder place where members don't really look at a Bill and debate the options and issues.
They act so dumb at times I find it hard to believe that they are not hostage to some underhand lobbying in one form or another. However, I consider our politicians pretty honest (only one sitting member ever charged - and this is still before the Courts) so I can only assume it is stupidity.
Section 92a of the Copyright (New Technologies) Amendment Act is the current problem. It requires ISPs to implement a policy to disconnect customers who repeatedly violate copyright online.
No proof is required - just a claim and they can disconnect you.
The offending clause was removed by a select committee, but was re-inserted by the minister responsible for the bill, Judith Tizard, when Labour was in power. Why is the question. Was she 'got at' by somebody? Who knows. Only the Greens and Maori Party opposed it. Sounds like the Electoral Finance Act all over again.
Tizard got the boot in the last election and is no loss as I always thought she was one of the more incompetent Ministers.
Maybe she is not stupid. Extension of her ideas to the rest of our laws will save millions.
Just accuse somebody of speeding, robbery, assault etc. then they are guilty - no trial, no defence, no proof required - just guilty by accusation. Even Stalin had mock trials. We won't even need them.
The Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ) and the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA) naturally think the law OK. This is the same outfit that is a friend of their overseas compatriots who opposed the Pianola, VCRs, Ipods, etc.
But now some common sense is coming into the debate and some are having second thoughts. One Labour MP wants to introduce a Private Members Bill to delete the section. Then why the hell did they vote for it!!
Ohhhh... they didn't understand what they were voting for.
Opponents gathered on the steps of Parliament and handed over a petition to United Future leader Peter Dunne who called for the repeal of the law which he voted in favour of!!!
Some protesters carried black placards, referencing the "blackout" protest that has seen users of online media sites replace their own images with a black square. Well known UK actor Stephen Fry has done this in support.
“All of us who brought in this Act last year believed we were protecting artists from piracy and illegal downloads. However, it is now clear that we have a situation where internet users are vulnerable to the mere accusation of piracy, and that is simply neither fair nor just,” Dunne said. Wow - he's bright - now!
Are they thick or what? What did they think would happen.
“The adversaries in this are not the nice guys who play in the band at the local tavern. They are international copyright owners who constantly scan the Internet using robotic devices that generate vast numbers of allegations of infringement. Once S92A becomes effective, they will inevitably programme their devices to focus on domain names with “.nz” at the end, in response to S92A making this country the world's softest target for their campaigns. This will potentially swamp small ISPs, business IT departments, and managers generally with a torrent of allegations with no obvious means to dispute them.”
ISPs may have to close down sites even if the complaint is malicious - for example, as a way to censor. It will be interesting if somebody complains about a political party's site and it is closed down. Then again it wouldn't be missed.
