The Pirate Party made a lengthy submission to the Attorney-General’s Department last Friday, responding to the Department’s “Online Copyright Infringement” discussion paper[1]. The submission highlighted a number of flaws with the discussion paper, such as reliance upon studies commissioned by copyright lobbyists[2], and also drew attention to the lack of government action on recommendations that could reduce online copyright infringement by improving prices and availability of digital content in Australia[3].

It also highlighted the lack of reliable and independent empirical evidence for the discussion paper’s proposals, and criticised attempts by copyright lobbyists to compare copyright infringement with terrorism or the distribution of child sexual abuse materials[4]. The discussion paper proposes creating obligations for Internet service providers to cooperate with copyright holders, which may mean implementing a graduated response or “three strikes” scheme where Internet users are sent letters if accused of infringing copyright. It also proposes allowing copyright holders to seek injunctions requiring ISPs to block access to websites.

Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer, principal author of the Pirate Party’s submission, said: “The Government decided to focus its attention on changing consumer behaviour and our submission explains at great length why that approach just won’t work. If online copyright infringement is truly out of control, copyright holders only have themselves to blame. The reality is that increasing access and affordability of content will reduce online copyright infringement: just look at Steam, Netflix and Spotify. The discussion paper acknowledges this but its proposals are focused in entirely the wrong area.

“Our arguments are backed up with as much independent evidence as possible, unlike those submitted by copyright lobbyists. The vast majority of lobbyist submissions used their own studies and statements to support their arguments. Village Roadshow literally submitted that online copyright infringement is a problem because they and Rupert Murdoch say it is. Government decisions should obviously be made on independent assessments, not on the word of vested interests.

“Despite the wishful thinking of the copyright lobby, there is scant evidence that accusing Internet users of copyright infringement and sending them warning letters acts as a deterrent to infringement. There is even less evidence that blocking websites will prevent infringement. As our submission makes clear, the evidence indicates that Internet users are simply circumventing detection and blockades instead. There are a wide range of easily available tools, such as virtual private networks, that people can and will use to continue unauthorised downloading without being detected.”

Brendan Molloy, President of the Pirate Party, added: “The reality is quite simple: the nature of the Internet has changed how culture pervades each of our lives and copyright has not kept up. This ham-fisted approach, as our submission demonstrates, is an entirely
unworkable approach; it is a bad solution looking for a problem.”

The Pirate Party is preparing a supplementary submission in response to some of the more extreme arguments made by copyright industry lobbyists.

[1] https://pirateparty.org.au/media/submissions/PPAU_2014_AGD_Online_Copyright_Infringement_DP.pdf
[2] http://www.screenassociation.com.au/uploads/reports/UMR_digital1.pdf
[3] http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2014/08/the-government-has-an-official-response-to-the-it-pricing-inquiry-but-you-cant-see-it-yet/
[4] http://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations/Documents/OnlineCopyrightInfringement/OnlineCopyrightInfringement-VillageRoadshowLimitedResponse.pdf