Member log in

ISP code aims to protect business from new copyright law

The Telecommunications Carriers Forum (TCF), representing telcos and the  largest ISPs, maintains it still hates the upcoming copyright law change. But nevertheless it’s issued a draft code of practice – required for ISPs under the law – which addresses the three-allegations-and-you're-out myth.

TCF chief executive Ralph Chivers (left) tells NBR a key message of the ISP draft code is that a business will not see its internet connection arbitrarily cut because of the actions of a single rogue employee under the Copyright Amendment (New Technologies) Act, due to come into force February 28.

Under the draft code, an ISP will pass along complaints from a copyright holder to its allegedly infringing customer immediately. The customer will also receive a summary of complaints each month, which Mr Chivers says will act as a warning – required under the controversial section 92A of the Act –- even though it won’t be explicitly labelled as such.

If more than three complaints against a customer are received within 18 months, then a disconnection process will begin. Customers will have the right to dispute infringement notices under the code, says Mr Chivers.

The 18-month time-frame and trio of warnings will give any business ample to deal with an employee who is downloading pirated music or movies, Mr Chivers says.

Asked whether copyright holders like RIANZ would accept such a liberal warning regime, Mr Chivers points out that a serial offender would receive three notices in three months.

The aim of the code is to give large and small ISPs a template for their code of practice required by the new law, Mr Chivers says.

No three-allegations-and-you're-gone
The code also aims to dispel the “urban myths” around the act, such as that three spurious allegations against a customer will be enough to prompt a connection to be disconnected, or a take-down notice issued against a website.

“The code requires a standard of proof that would stand up in a court of law,” Mr Chivers says. “People are not going to come home from holiday and find their internet disconnected or their site taken down. People will get three clear warnings, and the chance to refute them with their ISP.”

The draft also contains a provision for large organisations that hold their own IP address – such as a publisher, or TradeMe, to introduce their own code of practice. If they do, ISPs will put them in direct touch with any complaining copyright holder.

The draft Code of Practice is available through the TCF’s website, with submissions open until 5pm on March 5.

More by By Chris Keall

Signup to free NBR email alerts here

Comments and questions
4

If Mr Chivers is correct that the standard of proof required is one that would hold up in a court of law, then he's got the answer right there: Decide the matter in court. Unfortunately for New Zealanders, both the previous and present Governments have rolled over for Hollywood and abrogated the accused's right to due process.

Thanks to some bright legal minds in Labour and National we are headed down the slippery slope to police statehood, where an unaccountable third party can bring about punishment without being challenged. The saddest irony is that the cops aren't even involved and any tinhorn wannabe can pin on a badge and ride the digital range as a copyright marshal -- all for a measly fee.

"Refute with your ISP" is not the same as demanding evidence from your accuser, and has no place in a democratice society. Section 92A has one rightful place...the dustbin.

The law is illegal. There are fundamentals in law that no Statute may change and this has been reaffirmed time and again, and also in Statutes, as reminders to those that so try. Further, any code the Telcos, ISPs or anyone else dreams up to apply the law is also illegal. Their obligation is to tell the accuser to follow due process and get lost. What is due process? Accusations must be heard in the Queen's Courts by a legal jury. All sworn Judges are obliged by law to strike down any Statute that contravenes principles reaffirmed in the Magna Carta.

There is a reason why we have courts. And it is a very good reason. If this section 92A is the way to go, why not also use the concept for people accused of other crimes like say rape or shop lifting.

It is time for 'Hollywood' to move with the technology and change their business model. Maybe we should use section 92A to protect cartwheel manufactures.

the incident of the bubble being popped in waihopai puts into perspective a third party charging someone with a crime without due process. unfortunately the majority of new zealanders or kiwis as they are known are adverse to protesting about their rights. maybe its because they believe in fair play and everyone is equal under the sun-yeah right!

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>