MEDIA RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday 17 March, 2009
CFF launch the What About Usvideo series against S92A
The Creative Freedom Foundation launch their interactive video series What About Us today. The series will feature
YouTube video statements by New Zealand artists and others who are not represented in the private sector decision-making
process that will determine whether the controversial Guilt Upon Accusationlaw Section 92A comes into effect.
The law is due to come into force on March 27thif two non-governmental groups – the Telecommunications Carriers' Forum
(TCF) and selected Rights Holders – agree on a policy. One of the largest members of the TCF, TelstraClear, have
recently withdrawn from the negotiations protesting the law as unworkable.
CFF Director Bronwyn Holloway-Smith says “We've blacked out our websites against this law and now we're looking straight
at the camera, introducing the people that this law will affect but who are not represented in the decision-making
process.”
What About Uslaunches with videos featuring Yulia, Glyn MacLean, Luke Buda (Phoenix Foundation), Peter Dunne
(UnitedFuture), Luke Rowell (Disasteradio) and Imon Star (Olmecha Supreme). The videos are available to view on
www.CreativeFreedom.org.nz alongside statements from other artists, business owners and educators. Instructions are also
available for those who want to join in and contribute statements to the series via YouTube.
Holloway-Smith says “The delay to S92A didn't fix its fundamental problems and we've found that many people have genuine
concerns and questions about the law that have not been addressed in the new situation. They see that the law will
affect them in their daily lives, but the only interests that are being looked after in the negotiations are those of
the TCF and selected Rights Holders. So, as a result we're giving everyone concerned with this law the opportunity to
speak up and have their say through the simplicity of YouTube videos.”
The Creative Freedom Foundation say that S92A cannot be implemented because it's incomplete, unfair as written,
excessive, and unsubtle – they call for it to be repealed and replaced with a common-sense alternative. Suggestions for
alternatives advocated by the CFF are to reduce ISP scope to those capable of enforcement, to change from a
'notice-and-takedown' model to the internationally popular 'notice-and-notice' model, and to establish an affordable
independent copyright tribunal for settling disputes.
“Like Prime Minister John Key – we recognise that the internet can't be a lawless 'wild west' which is why we need
justice for copyright holders, justice for the accused, and representation in the decision making process”says
Holloway-Smith.
ENDS