Copyright levies - the answer to our downloading dramas?

A suggested licensed or levied approach to internet connections could pay royalties and stop Metallica having to go busking. Photo / Martin Sykes

The shadow minister for ICT, Clare Curran has added her voice to New Zealand's copyright debate by saying that a licence fee or levy should be added into the cost of internet connections which could then be distributed to copyright holders, removing the need to prosecute for copyright infringement.

Similar models have been trialled overseas with levies already in use within several EU countries and Canada for blank recordable media. In the Irish Sea, the Isle of Man have taken things one step further and are charging one pound per month for music downloads.

The Isle of Man model has attracted a lot attention, and raises several interesting points, many of which are equally applicable to New Zealand's situation.

At one level, charging internet uses a levy makes a considerable amount of sense. An entire generation of downloaders is so accustomed to getting music for free that that ensuring artists and record labels get a fair slice the music pie is a huge issue that is only set to grow as downloading becomes more entrenched. Charging a monthly fee in return for no copyright prosecutions at the ISP subscription stage means downloaders could continue downloading music and Madonna and Metallica wouldn't have to resort to busking.

Advocates of the levied approach to copyright argue that the problem is so vast and entrenched that solving it would require an entire generation of internet users be criminalised, which is clearly absurd and totally impractical.

Detractors however argue that implementing a levy isn't a practical option and that the logistical, political and commercial challenges involved make the levy option unworkable.

For any levy model to work, several things need to happen. For a start, ISPs need to agree to charge the levy and to monitor what is being downloaded so the right copyright holders can be paid what is due to them. Given the steep costs likely to be involved and the lack of any real incentive for ISPs to do any of this, getting their buy in is likely to be at best a challenging proposition.

This brings us to the next challenge. Copyright holders used to fat margins on CD/DVD recordings would also have to agree to getting paid significantly less than they are currently getting. Levies would need to stay lest they become too onerous for most internet users. Balancing the very different and separate needs of both copyright holders and internet users is likely to border on impossible.

Then there's the thorny issue of making all or some internet users pay the levy. For those who don't download music, TV shows or movies, having to pay an additional levy is likely to be very poorly received indeed. Last and by no means least, existing pay to download online music and movie services are also likely to resist any copyright levy legislation fiercely as it has the potential to render their businesses obsolete.

Credit where credit is due however, it is clear Curran has put a lot of thought into these challenges and says that an independent rights agency would need to be established to distribute fees, removing some of the costs associated with a levy from ISPs. With the current re-write of Section 92A of the Copyright act already proposing an independent Copyright Tribunal to police and oversee copyright infringement matter, Curran's idea doesn't seem all that far fetched.

Curran is also adopting a realistic stance on her copyright proposals, saying that "some of them are still just ideas. They need more work. But if you're going to spend taxpayer dollars isn't it be better to spend them enabling access to content and distributing funds to the people who created it". Will Curran's ideas fly? Only time will tell, at least someone's doing some creative thinking.