The following is taken in its entirety from the current GRINZ newsletter:
After 12 years of photographers working towards this with the government(s), Associate Commerce Minister Judith Tizard has announced that the Copyright Act (1994) is under review, specifically the Commissioning Rule as it relates to photography.
Even if you aren’t a full-time professional photographer currently, this may apply to you. Have you ever taken photos for a friend / workmate / colleague / employer / social group / club, for which they paid you, gave you something in return, or covered your costs? Then you may not actually own the copyright in those images – but you could, and you should, in future. Potentially (and I’m not a lawyer, so this is somewhat speculation), even if all you got in return was tea & coffee at the club meeting rooms, that could be considered payment – and that may be enough for it to be a commission. If you ever intend to become a photographer, do a little of it on the side, have friends or children who do, or might in future, you can help yourself and them now.
A discussion document, "The Commissioning Rule, Contracts and the Copyright Act 1994" prepared by the Ministry of Economic Development, considers two main issues: the provision of the Copyright Act 1994 that deals with commissioned works, known as the "commissioning rule"; and the interface between copyright and contract law. The discussion paper seeks PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS on this provision, and in particular, whether any changes or amendments are considered necessary.
Submissions close on 31 MAY 2006. You can download the discussion document here.
Emailed submissions are encouraged. They should be sent to copyrightact@med.govt.nz.
So What Can I Do?
The AIPA and NZIPP will be preparing comprehensive submissions seeking the removal of the "Commissioning Rule" (i.e. section 21(3) of the Copyright Act) so that the author of any commissioned work is the first owner of copyright.
WE NEED YOUR HELP! In order to help bring about the removal of the "Commissioning Rule", please take the following action ASAP.
Everyone can post the following letter to your local MP (or alter it to suit your needs, or draft your own – just send SOMETHING!). A full list of MPs can be found at www.ps.parliament.govt.nz/mps.htm – and feel free to cc: it to Judith Tizard and Helen Clark as well, if you like. My feeling is that the more noise we make, the better.
Dear (insert your MP’s name),
You may be aware that the Ministry of Economic Development is currently seeking consultation from concerned parties regarding its pending review of the Contracts and the Copyright Act, 1994.
As a professional photographer, my livelihood is directly affected by this Act. In particular, the current Commissioning Rule (Section 21(3) of the Act) has had an adverse effect on my ability to make a living.
The default position of the Law requires me to contract out of the Act in order to be protected by it. You must agree this is not a fair position to be in as it is both cumbersome and puts me at a disadvantage when negotiating with potential clients. Further, the language of the Act does not guarantee me payment for my work. A client only has to "agree to pay" in order to have full ownership of the copyright in my work. Even if they never pay, by law they still own the copyright.
Most importantly, the Commissioning Rule of the current Act is entirely out of step with international copyright conventions, to which New Zealand is a party, as well as with copyright laws of our major trading partners, making it more difficult for me to compete on the international arena.
Repealing the Commissioning Rule will put New Zealand photographers in the same position as regards copyright ownership as their colleagues in Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland, the United States and most other western countries. The present Act not only makes it much more difficult for New Zealand photographers to compete internationally but is also a source of embarrassment that a country and a government that place so much importance on the development of the creative industries and the protection of intellectual property should be so out of step with such a fundamental right.
Within the established framework of the discussion as outlined in the Government’s Discussion Paper: "The Commissioning Rule, Contracts and the Copyright Act 1994" the only viable option as far as I and my professional colleagues are concerned is OPTION 2: Repeal section 21(3) of the Act: "The author of any commissioned work is the first owner of copyright."
I will be keeping you informed as the Discussion Paper moves through the consultation process. I hope, this letter will allow you to familiarise yourself briefly with the basic points of how the Commissioning Rule affects the livelihoods of people like me as well as numerous architects, designers, illustrators, computer programmers, painters, draftsmen, cartographers, engravers, model makers, sculptors, and film makers. The Commissioning Rule must be repealed.
Yours sincerely,
(Insert your name and signature)
This may be our only chance to repeal the Commissioning Rule! So PLEASE, put aside a few minutes of your time to complete these tasks.
Thanks everyone –
R!
Via GRINZ