Member log in

71% of young Kiwis would stop illegal downloads if warned by ISPs

About 71% of New Zealanders aged between 15 – 30 would stop downloading illegal content if their internet service provider warned them against it, a survey  has revealed.

This figure was up 1% on the same survey commissioned by NZFACT last year. The questions and structure of the survey remained the same, as did the research panel.

Screen Director’s Guild executive director Anna Cahill said the survey's findings demonstrated a need for stronger legislation against copyright theft. “New Zealand artists and audiences stand to lose unless the government strengthens the proposal to build a framework for stopping online copyright infringement.

“The fact is this remains an issue about New Zealanders’ livelihoods. The screen industry provides 15,000 jobs and is worth $2.7 billion locally. Its continued growth is dependent upon a legal regime that values creative work.”

The survey also showed 20% of respondents had downloaded illegal content, of that 65% of people did not feel guilty about it, but 62% said they would probably stop downloading illegal content if their internet connection was threatened by their ISP.

NZFACT executive director Tony Eaton said ISPs had a crucial role to play in preventing copyright from being breached.

“ISPs, as our partners in this online market, play a vital part in reaching out to their customers about the importance of copyright, and enforcing their own terms and conditions with regards to customers who repeatedly engage in online infringement.”

Mr Eaton said he was extremely pleased with the result of the survey. He said the respondents were from various parts of the country and showed a good cross-section of New Zealand’s youth. “It shows that education initiatives are reaching the target audience,” he said.

Lowndes Jordan partner Rick Shera said the NZFACT survey was consistent with figures around the world. Mr Shera said many people surfing the internet and downloading content in their homes do not necessary know they are breaching copyright laws, and would be willing to stop if they were alerted to the problem.

Mr Shera said the film studios or record labels affected would contact the ISP with an infringement notice, alerting them to the fact that illegal content had been downloaded. The ISP would then use an internet protocol (IP) address to locate the users and then either issue them with a notice or a copy of the original infringement notice.

But Mr Shera said the industry was still working out how to enforce such notices. A current case being held in a federal court in Sydney could have huge implications for the entertainment industry both in Australia, New Zealand and further abroad.

The case between Australian ISP iiNet and 34 claimants, including US and Australia film studios such as Warner Bro and Village Roadshow, has been adjourned until November 2, as several witnesses were not available until then.

The case involves thousands of infringement notices that were sent to iiNet regarding its users illegal downloading of content. The claimants have alleged that iiNet encouraged and promoted its users to breach copyright laws. iiNet has strongly denied the allegations and defended its position.

The case could have far-reaching affects if the jury finds in favour of the claimants, and would hopefully provide some clarity on whether ISPs have a responsibility to ensure its users are not breaching copyright laws.
 

More by Kelly Gregor

Comments and questions
7

A similar number of kiwis would find that they then did not need their 'all-you-can-eat' data plans, then. If I did not download 'illegal' material, I'd use about 3GB a month, as opposed to about 50 GB. Bye bye profit, ISPs.
And music/movie rights-holders, stop dreaming about all your lost revenue. That fact is, most people of my generation simply don't have the money to pay for even a fraction of the entertainment they consume. I download and listen to 10 - 15 albums a day (95% of which are not even available in New Zealand shops), and probably 20 movies a week. Who could afford to pay for all that? Gone are the days of spending $30 on a CD then listening to it over & again for weeks - I'm lucky if I listen to an album twice. Movies are more often than not disposable rubbish that is instantly forgettable, why pay $15 to sit in a theatre with a bunch of ill-mannered strangers who I don't like (talking & txting throughout) to watch a movie (that I can't even pause to go to the toilet - who can hold for 3 hrs?) several months after its US release? Get real.

65% do not feel guilty about - surprised it's that low.
Just watch "E" channel on sky for a couple of hours - Actor X made $70mil last year, singer Y made $50mil last year... ad infinitum.

Come on, this nonsense is all about protecting the sickening overinflated incomes of the already mega rich.

What makes an actor think they worth $20m per movie?

Fell guilty... pfft...

Like the last guy said, movies and music are now just disposable goods. $30 for a cd with 1 or 2 good songs doesn't work as business model anymore. Everyone can see that but them, but they cling on to it because it made them sh*itloads in the past.

The first 2 comments say it all.

Peoples attitudes about content, whether it be movies, music, etc have changed. There is so much more available to people now then there use to be. If we bring in these laws, people will simply find another way.

The industry (and similar to the print media industry) should accept times have changed. Gone are the days of these businesses effectively printing money and many people heaps alot from it.

When Edison unveiled the lightbulb, owners of large corporations that made huge profits from gaslights would no doubt have loved to have hidden that invention from the world.
Now, thru the internet, we have the lightbulb of today, and similar owners of similarly out-dated corporations wish that they could also turn back the clock.
The solution though, is quite simple. When you can download a legal copy of a movie when (or very shortly after) it first comes out, for a reasonable sum (say $10) at a decent quality, people will pay that rather than break the law. I would never spend more than that on a film, as it's very, very rare for me to watch a film more than once. Who needs a DVD/bluray of a comedy or a thriller? Neither are entertaining after the initial viewing.

The movie studios behind NZFACT need to embrace new technologies to make their content available to consumers to download at a sensible price point.

It's that simple - the right product at the right price and you have a business model.

ISPs are not there to serve as a Gestapo for the movie industry - rather, they best serve their customers by resisting anti-consumer lobby-group initiatives like that represented by NZFACT.

In any case, NZFACT a lobby group for the US-based movie industry - a.k.a. Hollywood. The argument that "this remains an issue about New Zealanders’ livelihoods" is bunk. What you mean to say is "woe is us - we are no longer able to overcharge consumers the way we once did".

Why you should feel guilty? Because you are downloading some stuff for free...and if the isp want to know what i am downloading they need to contact rapidshare-usenet and i don't think they gonna do that.

i agree with the first comment
kids these days dont have money to buy music and movies so they download, wats the big deal?? and plus if they do enforce this law into action internet services would lose a LOT of money!

Post new comment or question

Login to use your NBR member name
Full HTML is not supported but you can use the following tags in your comments:
Link: <url>link</url>
Quote: <quote>text</quote>