Curran’s Copyright Ideas
Clare Curran floats four copyright ideas:
Education about copyright is very important. Government has an important role to play and copyright education should become a part of the school curriculum and be integrated right through our education system. A public education campaign is also needed for people to understand that protecting the rights of people who create content is important.
I’ve got no problem with that per se, but would caution that education campaigns can become own goals. The nasty messages that get played at the start of videos usually result in derisory laughs.
When consumers can easily and reasonably purchase all the films, TV shows and music they want legally online, then an education campaign on why people should only do legal downloads etc would be useful. But if the only way someone can view a TV show is to grab it from a bit torrent network, then no amount of education will change that.
We should enable people to access the information/material they seek. And consider introducing a licensing fee attached to internet service provider (ISP) connections. This fee would then be collected and distributed by an external agency amongst copyright holders. In order to work, it would need the buy in of all ISPs and rights holders. It would likely be focussed on New Zealand copyright content first.
I think the future is going to be some sort of bulk license fee, paid through the ISP. Something alone the lines of $15/month for all the music you want.
However such a licensing fee should be a voluntary agreement between Internet users, their ISPs and rights holders. I would be very against an additional fee being imposed on all Internet users regardless of whether or not they wish to download material. A 75 year old occassional web browser should not have to pay for the 19 year old who downloads scores of songs a month.
Establishment of an independent rights agency to distribute fees and rule on disputes. We still need an enforcement regime and a rights agency could also have the power to investigate and adjudicate on copyright disputes and alleged infringements aka the Section 92A model. However, I am of the view that internet disconnection is not a viable option. It simply won’t work and will drive hard core copyright infringers more underground. Financial penalties are more likely to work.
I agree that that financial penalties are a more appropriate penalty for infringers. I think it is excellent Labour appear to be ruling out supporting legislation that has Internet termination as a penalty.
A commitment to protect NZ content first. It’s our heritage, and the people who create NZ content must be able to make a living from their work and have that work valued.
Can’t really debate that one, as it is one of those apple pie statements such as “Education is good” which doesn’t mean a lot. But I do think Clare is missing a few key words. It should be “must be able to have the opportunity to make a living from their work”. No-one is guaranteed the ability to make a living from their content. Otherwise us bloggers would be earning a lot more!
July 20th, 2009 at 7:08 am
Those ads at the front of DVDs I have purchased make me want to pirate them One more reason not to buy local – Amazon-sourced DVDs dont have that crap on them.
July 20th, 2009 at 7:33 am
Nasty messages at the front of DVDs make me decide never to buy from that maker again.
July 20th, 2009 at 7:45 am
A good start would be some of the large ‘copyright holding’ companies ie Music and Film corporations, apologising to their customers for treating them like criminals for the last ten years.
Then they could admit that the $$$ losses they tout when lobbying Government are a complete load of crap.
Then they could explain WHY the film industry worldwide has had a massively rising turnover while all the ‘thieves’ have been ‘stealing’ their content
After that they could try co-relating the rise in video games with falls in DVD rentals and sales instead of blaming their ex customers.
After that they can go F*ck themselves for a couple of years and then I MIGHT start buying some of the overpriced pap they have to push to keep their bloated corporate business model afloat.
July 20th, 2009 at 8:00 am
So she wants to teach copyright in schools, does she? Labour has it all arse about face again.
Lets teach the kids to read, write and count first. Then teach them the real function of profit, the difference between right and wrong and the reality of responsibilities which go with ‘rights.’ I could think of a hell of a lot more things I’d want to teach before I wasted the school’s time teaching copyright. Like the difference between profit and dividends.
If all these things were taught in the first place then we would not need to teach copyright.
July 20th, 2009 at 8:01 am
Well, I must say that those messages have worked for me- I don’t download cars.
On a related idea, at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/pirate_this_film.html is a comment highlighted by Tim Blair: “the irony of fans of a sworn enemy of private enterprise and bourgeoisie property laws ripping off a filmmaker seems lost on both Soderbergh and the Guardian’s Henry Barnes”. Pirate Che: you know that you want to.
July 20th, 2009 at 8:37 am
This idea is on a par with Jonathan Hunt’s idea that the TV licence fee be added to the phone bill on the basis that all phone subcribers had TV’s. Amnother idea (from Europe) was that a copyright levy be imposed on blank recording media.
Rogernomics completely swamped Jonathan’s idea anong with Margaret Shield’s idea that Kapiti phone operators with less to do because of direct dialling shoud be re-deployed to phoning up elderly people each day to see how they are.
July 20th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Oh jesus..!!!
More fees, more regulations, more busy body bureaucrats to pry into people’s lives. These leftist morons can’t ever come up with anything else. Piss off Curran. Get back into the cave you crawled out of.
And Adolf is right. Just teach the children what they need to be able to understand the issue. Do not tell them what to think.
July 20th, 2009 at 10:52 am
I’d also argue that copyright infringement is a purely civil matter and let the owner take appropriate recourse againsrt alledged infringement. I don’t phone the police when I have a contractual issue with someone.
July 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Kiw Greg
Copyright is like any other property right and property rights are protected against theft or destruction by criminal legislation.
Evidential standards are more stringent for any criminal convictions. Therefore criminal sanctions are very unlikely for ‘one off’ copying.
It is the bulk manufacturing or importation of ‘pirated’ copyright material that can lead to criminal sanctions with a real possibility of jail time and forfeiture of crime proceeds. Similar for an operator of something like ‘Pirate Bay’.
Having said that I am not happy with USA trying to unilaterally dictate the scope of intellecual property (eg lengthening copyright periods) to the rest of the world.
July 20th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Personally I think passing legislation is an excuse for failed business models. In most cases illegal downloads are the only or easiest way to access said material efficiently. Until that changes I can’t see illegal sources going away.
In saying that why are there subscription models for music/movies in the USA but not here ie. pay a small nominal monthly fee for all-you-can-eat access to the entire music and movie catalogue. The music industry is stuck in the ’80s.