Minutes of Public Policy Committee - 7 August 2008

Present: Auckland - David Farrar (Chair), Jordan Carter (Staff), Michael Wallmannsberger, Judy Speight, David Diprose, Rick Shera.

Wellington - Richard Wood (Staff), Peter Macaulay

By Phone: Simon Riley, Jane Hindle.

Apologies - None

Opened: 3.05pm

AP – add members of exec board who aren’t already on pubpol to pubpol

1. Minutes of Last Meeting – 2 July 2008

Minutes of last meeting adopted as a true and accurate record.

2. Action Points / Matters Arising from the Previous Minutes

Privacy review – keep as open item – both seminars and issues paper.

Broadband App Round table – there is some interest – more to do.

Letter on interception of SMS messages – needs follow up.

Legal jurisdiction – a post election paper perhaps.

3. Copyright – Helping ISPs cope with the new Act

Rick is looking further at how we can deal with section 92(a). Whether it can be excluded from being brought into force, while a Code of Practice is talked about. Otherwise the regulations will bring 92(a) into force in about 1 month. We might seek another year. In HK they are setting up a users/rightsholders/ISPs working group.

4. NetSafe and ISP Self-regulation

NetSafe held its Cybercitizen conference in Queenstown 28-30 July.

Netsafe is seen as a thought leader in the cybersafety world. The conference had a number of speakers from overseas but was mainly a domestic audience. There is a rising visibility of rightsholders. Looks as if they are trying to align protection of IP in the online space with child safety in the online space. The conference was, arguably, sidetracked a little as a result.

Jordan initiated a discussion at the time about not seeing NetSafe to be used for these other issues. We need to be aware that the rightsholders industry is looking to get more wins after their win in the copyright legislation.

Keith noted there is a specific thrust happening everywhere to tighten copyright regulations.

We many need to think about this strategically. We need to be careful not to be absolutist and not become a “copyright users group”. The questions that need to be addressed include: Where do we see the issues going? What are the issues for us in terms of our mission? Making sure decisions are based on fact.

We should be thinking of proactively having regular speakers from overseas.

Need to coordinate with others impacted by these changes.

Rick reported. He said it’s becoming clear that ISPs need to be careful about being agnostic on peer to peer content. Simply saying we are just like roads is not going to cut it anymore. There are strong and powerful groups around who will make mincement of ISPs on that issue.

With respect to copyright with lots of vested economic issues it is being fought, we’ve seen it with NZ legislation, the late SOP and around the world. ISPs need to front up to this issue.

David Farrar noted that we need to be careful about talking about self-regulation of ISPs. Distinguish between storage on their own networks and on the wider internet.

We haven’t done a high level policy statement on what we see as the legitimate role of ISPs in terms of self-regulation and their role. Finessing it is a multi-meeting issue aiming to turn into an industry position. Something easily comprehended about the best way to respond to issues. Misunderstandings are easy if we don’t have it.

Jordan said there is urgency for ISPs to take some action but little headspace to deal with it.

David Farrar noted it’s about protecting rights of Internet users so our policy position is still relevant.

Michael said the challenge is to understand and rearticulate what the end-to-end principle means. The problem for us is that we have taken a position that the network should be neutral.

David Farrar said there is no issue that all sites with illegal child pornography should be blocked. We can win on encouraging ISPs but the right way.

Rick noted there is a constituency that presents ISPs and InternetNZ as saying filtering is a waste of time.

David Farrar noted there is an issue with the effectiveness of filtering.

Michael said ISPs having no position has been the problem.

Jordan noted we are the only organisation able to produce a policy.

Lawrence Lessig is coming to New Zealand on November 3.

Simon noted the changing roles of ISPs. If we are going to change positions that ISPs need to take some responsibility for content, filtering or blocking of child porn are very different issues to copyright. We need to get on the front foot. Maybe we need a think piece that starts to look at all the issues involved at a high level and looking at a sweep of the issues and how we might frame up that debate. Commissioning a think piece so we aren’t continually in reactive mode.

David Diprose said perhaps what is needed is a set of principles and a framework with codes of practice in various areas.

ISPANZ discussed the ICOP today and there is still a willingness to do it.

Jordan discussed what the ICOP is. May need to work from ground zero and use our draft as an input into it.

It was felt it should be an ISPANZ project and we should focus on the principles, but supporting ISPANZ.

AP. Staff - Contact the person organizing Lawrence Lessig’s visit and see if he has any further availability while in New Zealand.

AP. Staff - Work on 1^st draft of high level principles in respect to InternetNZ stance on regulation and self-regulation.

AP. Jordan - identify if there is appropriate budget for Copyright and self-regulation.

AP. Staff - Include in agenda for next PPC, a strategic discussion about the Internet copyright environment, and how InternetNZ should be contributing to the debate.

5. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Rick – everyone knows we know nothing more than we did from the start. We haven’t been given all the details. InternetNZ has made a submission.

David Farrar – their may not be enough to say this is a major issue. In terms of operational priorities, changes, not convinced we should be doing more.

Rick – I’ve had contact on both issues with the IIA in Australia and he is very keen to get alongside with InternetNZ or ISPANZ. They take a very aggressive approach and care would need to be taken. With respect to dealing with ACTA there may be some benefits there.

AP. Staff – make contact with IIA to discuss this and other issues.

6. Election debate update

TVNZ and InternetNZ partnership is being negotiated. More news to the next meeting, or when a proposal is agreed.

AP. Circulate proposal

7. Accounting Separation

We put in a submission. Telecom’s submission in our view misinterpreted the Act arguing Accounting Separation should be legacy, whereas that isn’t the case at all. Cross-submissions are due 14 August.

Telecom’s approach appears to be part of a broader, wider push back in the regulatory debate.

8. NGN Consultation

NGN project team met. Submission due date delayed. Conference delayed until next year.

Commission doesn’t want this to be seen as a prelude to regulation. Any regulation would be as a result of other investigations and at least two years away.

9. Cyberlaw review update

Has been a first round of consultations. Have come back with an interim recommendation to roll over the Cyberlaw fellow for a year. This was put to the AGM, who felt it was appropriate. Full members consultation will occur at the members consultation as it is a major ticket item and we need to advise Vic Uni.

There will be a draft report to lay out future options. One of the things raised by Vic was the value of looking at elevating this from a senior research fellow to that of a chair. It takes months of negotiation.

Issues of process were raised, and timing issues were discussed in terms of board, council and members meetings.

If Vic agree to a rollover then need to think about topic areas for research.

Thanks expressed for the work of the consultation group.

AP. Agenda item for next month – brainstorm research topic for 2009 Fellow.

10. Privacy Review

They are going got publish a consultation paper by the end of the year.

11. Updates/Issues:

1. Fibre RFP – approval of this is a council decision. Pete regards it as approved. Excellent response. Delay due to getting sign off. Wigley as chair was a good decision.
2. Rural Broadband Working Party – finished its work, as a draft that was sent to Govt. They misread it as a prospective list of demands: the Working Party has clarified this was not the case.
3. Rural Conference – TUANZ – Jane reported – seemed to be a maturing of minds and a real highlight was Dr Mark MacElroy from Connected Nation. It was quite well received. Certainly more moving forward than the first one. Jordan said it was a good look at applications.
4. TSO – TCF has launched its report on the TSO. We’ve had questions from Govt about our view. We haven’t changed from our submission. Simon noted we have a deviation from the TCF. We had an overriding recommendation to phase it out over time. Our view on contestable was that it wasn’t worth it, particularly locally.

AP. Jordan – review TCF vs our submission.

5. Questionnaire – need to put together a survey, their policies may not be done ahead of the debate.

AP. Jordan, David, Staff – meet and put together a survey on Political Party positions.

6. NetSafe Conference – Queenstown
7. ACCC Regulatory Conference – Brisbane – Jordan reported – mixed usefulness. It was about reviewing the rational for regulation. The particular useful thing was networking with Commerce Commission staff and other people at the conference. Op Sep is unlikely in Australia.
8. Keith attended the APAN meeting hosted by REANNZ and it was very interesting in terms of Advanced Education and Research Networks. Discussion of Open Access Networks with Ernie and Chris O’Connell and getting a definition. There is urgency to having this definition available in terms of the Broadband Investment Fund.
9. The future of BIF – Simon noted a need for a contingency that if there is a change of Govt then BIF is dead. That puts applicants in an awkward position. There is nothing that we can do, but for all the metro CEOs and Mayors it is a risk. Councils should still be encouraged to continue with their broadband planning. We need to talk to the National Party about what they would do about it. We may be able to make a connection that having some local body work going will be useful and may fit in with their end goals. National would still need to do something in rural areas. There is still a policy to double the old broadband challenge fund.

12. Any Other Business

None.

Meeting Closed: 4.57pm

Date of next meeting: TBC

Signed as a true and correct record:

…………………………………………………

David Farrar, Member, Chair

Draft Author: Richard Wood

Draft Reviewer: Jordan Carter, David Farrar

Draft to PPC: 25 August 2008

Amended:

Adopted: