Google takes side of angels in NZ copyright suit

Google joined thousands of activist protesters in opposing New Zealand's controversial Section 92A, the so-called "Guilty Upon Accusation" copyright clause which requires Internet providers to disconnect users who record companies accuse of illegal file-sharing.

In its submission, Google notes that more than half (57%) of the takedown notices it has received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998, were sent by business targeting competitors and over one third (37%) of notices were not valid copyright claims.

As such, Google says "Section 92A puts users’ procedural and fundamental rights at risk, by threatening to terminate users’ internet access based on mere allegations and reverse the burden of proof onto a user to establish there was no infringement."

Google went on to object that there was no provision for independent adjudication of Fair Use exceptions or education about them, and that the proposed penalty was disproportional to the harm. Further, they said "excessive copyright protection can stifle creativity, choke innovation, impoverish culture and block free and fair competition. "

I couldn't agree more.

In Canada, they think of American copyright laws as "extremist", which makes sense when we're seeing a threatened 6-month jail term for posting a handful of Guns N Roses songs, even though he promptly took them down when asked. In Sweden, a law allowing copyright vultures to get the IP addresses of suspected file-sharers is opposed by a majority.

Washington Post columnist Rob Pegoraro wonders about copyright in relation to "mash-ups" of YouTube videos, with tiny bits of many videos combined into a single new one — something he sees as similar to the "samples" used by hip-hop artists. The Toronto Globe considers a similar topic.