The RIANZ are only representing their own interests. Where are all the other artists, the indepedent musicians, the writers, the people who create rather than the people who take earnings from the people that create. And, the largest interested party, the people, because Parliment sure doesn’t seem to be representing their overwhelming views.

Post-election …. Apparently there has been discussion going on between the main parties (telcos/ISP’s and RIANZ etc) about what the code of conduct should be. The rights holders have walked away from that (ie RIANZ). That has left it as each individual ISP doing it and no way of getting any ability to question assertions of rights of accusers.

It isn’t particularly party political as is shown by virtually every blog site of all persuasions are hammering it. The RIANZ’s stupid actions have just broadened it into the wider sphere. It is more in the order of the ongoing argument about digital vs analogue

Essentially I think what I always did – the clause should be dropped.

At the risk of sounding even more tedious than I normally am I will quote from my previous comment:

“Your proposed amendment does not go far enough. S92 in its entirety needs revisiting. The idea that the law can be made good through the simple expediency of a Ministerial approved CoP is a red herring that once again switches the onus onto ISPs to produce something that complies with bad law.”

Oh yeah, blame the election – that had nothing to do with passing decent law. Parliament is elected to pass decent and workable laws – not to be reelected.

The negotiation *was* only between a few interested parties, Labour cocked up, the minor parties other than Greens didnt know what was going on and Labour wasn’t talking to the Greens. In the end Labour cocked it up. Now it is trying to fix the law. If Labour had any balls it would have introduced an SOP in exactly the same form as Currans bill. It didn’t because it was too focused on digging up the dirt on JK in Aussie.

Now lprent is trying to say the election was a factor.Oh puhleeease!

http://www.thestandard.org.nz/copyright-protest-pics/#comment-118467

I think that in this guest post is great and shows a good understanding of the issues and concerns that many IT copyright holders have about S92. I’d like to express my thanks once again.

I think there is an opportunity for both the major parties to agree to change the law. I know it is tempting to to paint one another as the ‘bad guys’ but from conversations I have had I also know that people in *both* parties have had serious concerns about the Copyright reforms that went into law last year. It would be nice to see more cross bench co-operation on resolving this issue.

Of course it was complicated because of the election – which is why I didn’t notice the reinsertion after select committee.

Basically this just looks like a cockup from start to finish… The rest of the Act looks fine. I understand that a lot of negotiation went in on this clause. However it was largely between only a few of the interested parties.