[mythtvnz] Another cheeky cap request - Rude Awakenings ep 1

[Nick Rout]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:15:27 +1300
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz> wrote:

>
> > The intent is you can't time shift if it is available on-demand. Does=
n't
> > matter if it is PPV or normal FTA TV.
> >=20
> > Hence if the ammendment was law we could all be prosecuted for record=
ing
> > Rude Awakenings last Friday.
>=20
> But was the web content available at the time you recorded it?
>=20
> I doubt it was up there _before_ it showed (with ads).

Here is the text of the propsed new section:

"84 Recording for purposes of time shifting

  "(1)  A person (A) does not infringe copyright in a programme
included in a communication work, or in any work included in it, by
recording it, if A---

      "(a)  makes the recording solely for A's private and domestic
use; and

      "(b)  makes the recording solely for the purpose of viewing or
listening to the recording at a more convenient time; and

      "(c)  cc; and

      "(d)  has lawful access to the communication work at the time of
making the recording.

 "(2)  However, subsection (1) does not apply, and A does infringe
copyright in the communication work recorded and in any work included
in the communication work, if---

      "(a)  A retains the recording for any longer than is reasonably
necessary for viewing or listening to the recording at a more
convenient time; or

      "(b)  in the event that the person who views or listens to the
recording wishes to make a complaint to a complaint authority, A
retains the recording for any longer than is reasonably necessary to
prepare and despatch the complaint.

  "(3)  If a person infringes copyright under subsection (2), the
recording is treated as an infringing copy.
=20
Example

A records a movie to be screened on television because she will be at
work when it screens. She watches the movie on the weekend and then
later tapes over it. Provided the conditions in s 84(1) are met, the
copy that A makes is not an infringing copy.
=20
B copies music from a streamed Internet audio service and keeps the
copy as part of B's music collection, in order to listen to it multiple
times on demand. Copies made for the home library or collection in this
way are infringing copies."

This compares to the current provision:

84 Recording for purposes of time shifting =09

(1) The making for private and domestic use of a recording of a
broadcast or cable programme solely for the purpose of enabling the
recording to be viewed or listened to at a more convenient time does
not infringe copyright in the broadcast or cable programme or in any
work included in the broadcast or cable programme.

(2)A recording that is=E2=80=94

(a)Made under subsection (1) of this section; and

(b)Retained for any longer than is necessary=E2=80=94

(i)To enable the recording to be viewed or listened to at a more
convenient time; and

(ii)If the person who viewed or listened to the recording wishes to
make a complaint, to enable that person to prepare and despatch a
complaint, including the recording, to any person or body having
responsibility for dealing with complaints about the content of
broadcasts or cable programmes or advertising contained in broadcasts
or cable programmes=E2=80=94

infringes copyright in the broadcast or cable programme recorded and in
any work included in the recording, and shall be treated as an
infringing copy.=20

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Sorry about the long quotes.=20

IMHO under the proposed new provision the words "is not able lawfully
to access the communication work on demand"  must relate to the time at
which the recording is made, so if it might be available later on the
net, that doesn't count.

Is it the same work if it is only available at a very low bitrate- like
the 56k version?

Also "on demand" is not defined as far as i can see. One could argue
that paid for content is not "on demand".

Also if Rude Awakenings is available "on demand" at present, is it
legal for me to be saving it to my hard drive, or do I have to only
watch it "streaming"?

Also if I cannot access the net stream because I don't have a
computer, or I have a crap net connection, am I "able lawfully to
access the communication work" - is the ability to legally timeshift
available only for the poor/rural/computer illiterate people who do not
have a decent net connection.

Man I love the way Parliament creates more work for lawyers every time
they pass a new law!