The guilt by association clause in the Copyright Ammendment Act was likened to the Electoral Finance Act.
But there is one important difference. The previous government which enacted the EFA didn’t listen to its critics.
The new government has listened and a press release from Commerce Minister Simon Power says that it will ammend the controversial section 92A.
Telstra Clear has pulled out of the Telecommunications Carriers’ Forum and its attempts to make secion 92A of the Copyright (New Technologies) Ammendment Act workable.
Section 92A, which requires ISPs to have a policy of disconnection in place for repeat infringers of copyright online, has been the focus of protests over the last few months.
The code will not solve copyright issues, says Mirams.
“It is not our role to make bad legislation work,” he says. “The industry had no input into section 92A. [The draft code] is bad for our customers. Customers and businesses have spoken via blogs and petitions and also directly to us. We have listened and we have agreed.”
That may not have killed the controversial clause which prompted the internet blackout but it will almost certainly lead to a terminal diagnosis because John Key said if ISPs couldn’t reach agreement the section would be suspended.
Hat Tip: goNZoFreakpower and geekzone.
The NBR reports that the government will delay the implementation of section 92 of the Copyright ammendment Act for a month.
Prime Minister John Key announced at a post-cabinet press conference this afternoon that implementation of the controversial clause of the copyright legislation to be delayed until March 27.
“We are hoping that by that time we will have come up with a voluntary code of practice,” Mr Key said.
If no agreement is reached, Section 92A will be suspended.
Thank goodness we’ve got a government with the good sense to do the right thing.
Yahoo & thank you. 🙂
UPDATE: No Minister and Kiwiblog have related posts.
UPDAYE 2: Inquiring Mind cautions that while a skirmish has been won the war is not over.
When I started blogging I made my politics clear (I admit to the blue tint in the header and my National Party involvement on the About page).
I did that because I decided not to be anonymous (my name is also on the About page) and having done that thought it was important to be upfront about my bias – though regular readers probably don’t need to be told I’m not trying to be balanced 🙂
I also decided I’d leave criticism of National to others in much the way I might take issue with friends or family when I’m with them but not in front of others; and because there are enough people keen to criticise any party in public without its members joining in.
However, I’m making an exception over the guilt on association copyright law for two reasons.
First because it’s bad law. David Farrar’s guest column at NZCPR explains why and I linked to several blogs which have covered the issue on an earlier post.
Second because it’s really stupid politics.
This is Labour’s mess thanks to then minsiter Judith Tizard. But she’s no longer in parliament and her party has seen the light so if section 92a and 92c are retained the mess and resulting problems will become National’s and the government risks losing far too much of the goodwill and support it’s won if it won’t clear it up.
It doesn’t have to be this way, they can delay the problem bits becoming law when cabinet meets tomorrow.
Failure to do so will exhibit a similar blind refusal to see sense as Labour and its allies exhibited with Electoral Finance Act.
Like Keeping Stock I’m not confident of blacking out this site without killing it completely but I’ll try and if that doesn’t work I’ll certainly be showing that I’m backing the blackout even though I’m blue.
The Electoral Finance Act has gone so the government can turn it’s attention to addressing another threat to freedom of expression – the Guilt by Association law Section 92A.
See more at: goNZofreakpower, MacDoctor, Hand Mirror, Not PC, WhaleOil, Kiwiblog, Juha Saarinen and Russell Brown.