Letter I wrote

NZ is currently having a bit of a crisis with regards to its Copyright Act. I wrote this letter to a couple of politicans to address the topic:

Hi,

I have been informed by one of my regular news websites that there are plans for a change in New Zealand copyright law that provides for individuals having their Internet access severed should they be accused of Internet-based copyright infringement - the cited portion inspecifically being 92A of the act. I am assuming that my understanding of the change is correct, in that the accusation is all that is sufficient for an individual to be affected by this act, and that measures for a prosecution or defense to be entered in to is not necessary for the act to take effect. Beyond the fact that it is an unnecessarily harsh and ill considered to cessate a citizen's access to the Internet for a copyright crime, to do so without space for defence or assessment seems ridiculous and ill considered. I recognise the fact that in the time of a recession governments tend to prioritize economic systems that benefit industries over citizens, however, this is not a situation that benefits consumers or producers. I feel that, even were the accused guilty of copyright infringement, taking away Internet access just simply seems to take the easy way out. I don't even really understand how this could be enforceable. Given that, statistically speaking, most people that are subverting copyright are going to be young persons in shared housing, monitoring who, exactly, is responsible for breaking the law, or preventing them from doing it again would be a nightmare. It sounds expensive, ill planned, and needlessly myopic in its preparation for use. Even were the bill to be more lenient, simply severing an individual's access to the Internet seems to be a somewhat ridiculous in that it is a fairly redundant inconvenience, instead of a legitimate provision for improving the systems of society. I believe that I have understood this change to the act as it has been explained to me, and, if it stands as the correct interpretation of the act, then I feel that it must be changed or removed. I voted for the Green Party with my party vote in the last election, and, while I am aware that this does not cause you any social "debt" to me, I voted because I believe that we share a similar set of beliefs and principles with regards to New Zealand's future. I hope that you share my beliefs that this Act is an awkward an unncessary step in the wrong direction, and I would appreciate any indication that this act is going to be challenged in its procession through parliament.



So, yeah, it's not the best, but it'll do.


UPDATE: Original source article is here.