Updated: New Zealand seeks to restrain ACTA

SUBSCRIBE
Newsletter & Subscriptions Computerworld is New Zealand's only specialised information systems fortnightly.
Subscribe now for $100 (23 issues) and save more than 37% off the cover price!
SIGN UP
Newsletter & Subscriptions
Get the latest news from Computerworld delivered via email.
Sign up now
New Zealand, Canada and others seek limitations on scope of secret copyright treaty

New Zealand appears to be at odds with the US in the secret international Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) talks.

According to Canadian internet law specialist Michael Geist a new leak from the negotiations has revealed a "significant disagreement on a range of issues" among the countries involved. 

"For example, on the issue of anti-circumvention legislation and access controls, the US wants it included per the DMCA [Digital Millenium Copyright Act], but many other countries, including the EU, Japan, and New Zealand do not, noting that the WIPO [World Intellectual Property Organisation] internet treaties do not require it."
See also: 'Termination' questioned in new copyright law
New ACTA leak reveals internal conflicts among negotiators
EU data protection chief slams secret ACTA talks
Leaked ACTA draft reveals plans for internet clampdown
The new leak is a European Union document dating from just weeks ago, unlike some earlier leaks which could have been months old. The new document discloses in detail the proposals from the US and counter-proposals from the EU, Japan, and other ACTA nations. 

"The 44-page document also highlights specific concerns of individual countries on a wide range of issues including ISP liability, anti-circumvention rules, and the scope of the treaty.  This is probably the most significant leak to-date since it goes even beyond the transparency debate by including specific country positions and proposals," Geist writes.

He says with respect to the requirement of a three strikes policy for ISPs as a pre-requisite for safe harbour, "New Zealand is opposed to the condition altogether".

The leak reveals the US, Japan, and the EU want civil enforcement powers to extend to any intellectual property right, while Canada, Singapore and New Zealand seek a more limited treaty that covers only copyright and trademarks.

Activists in New Zealand began Tweeting news of the leak this morning. One, the Tech Liberty group, asked: "Why do New Zealand citizens have to find out the New Zealand position in ACTA negotiations from leaked documents?"

Technologist Nat Torkington has further analysed New Zealand's positions on his website, saying he finds New Zealand to be a "voice of sanity" at the negotiating table. The treaty, he says, is going to need "a lot of close examination from people who can read the legal language and yet who are intimately familiar with the possibilities and opportunities of technology".

"This is why negotiation in secret is a bad idea — our country won’t benefit from the knowledge of experts until the text is set in stone. We’ll get something that likely has flaws, but we’ll have to approve or reject it 'warts and all'," he says.

He says the New Zealand negotiators are not keen on the catchall phrase "intellectual property" used in draft, preferring instead "copyright and related rights and trademarks". They also want to keep the Copyright Tribunal process, designed to replace the lack of due process in s92A, open. for that reason they prefer to use the the term "competent authorities" when talking about policing to "judicial authorities".

The local negotiators also want flexibility when it comes to awarding any damages for infringement and are questioning the scope of the term "online service provider" in line with recent changes to such expressions in proposed copyright legislation here.

The Ministry of Economic Development is also now seeking submissions on the negotiations, outlining key issues here. Submissions are due at the end of the month.
Comments
Read the leaked document You should read the leaked document. New Zealand appears to be in the thick of it contrary to perceptions conveyed by this article.

You could note that the current S92A proposal includes a three strikes provision and is an administrative procedure as opposed to a judicial procedure. The effect with respect to 2.17.3 (b) (i) is to not require online service providers to have a proactive policy but rather to comply with provisions of the law, passing notices, providing information where legally required to do so, and to comply with a District Court order to suspend service should the tribunal so determine. There is no conflict with New Zealand's negotiating position, and three strikes is implemented by the tribunal not the online services provider.

Making administrative procedures for IPR enforcement should be in accordance with the Bill of Rights Act Section 27 (2) which is not acknowledged in the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill, nor is the impact of this amendment measured against the Bill of Rights Act under Section 7 of the same. Are New Zealand citizens to be deprived of the right of Judicial appeal?

Taking the rights of New Zealand citizens away for the streamlined enforcement of foreign conglomerates copyrights hardly seems right, "or competent authorities" indeed. One can understand the desire to be able to deal with the sheer volume of infringement actions that could be targeted against New Zealand residents, but throwing them to the wolves because the Judiciary can't cope seems a bit extreme, in particular when the tribunal doesn't appear to have guiding rules of evidence and you would have no apparent right of appeal.

New Zealand is fully protecting the rights of ISPs but not it's citizens. This is what happens when negotiations are done in secret.

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill

Posted by DG at 15:39:47 on March 2, 2010

Flag abuse

Hope? It's good to see that New Zealand's position on this is less draconian than other countries such as the US. The DMCA has proven to be unworkable in the real world, and I shudder to think the impact it would have if applied world-wide.
In regards to the calls for transparency, NZ opening up about what it's discussing would weaken its negotiating position. And as NZ's stance on ACTA is one I agree with for the most part; the secrecy of these talks I regretfully accept for now.
Posted by Anonymous at 14:02:23 on March 2, 2010

Flag abuse

computerworld
Computerworld NZ has now reached LinkedIn! Join to expand your networks and meet others interested in information systems.