Auckland District Law Society are urging caution as regards Section 92A.
Google are against..
United Video are at first glance, for the change. However if you read between the lines:
"I trust this submission helps shed some light on the rental industry in New
Zealand and the far reaching effects this legislation could have in either
supporting us if passed, or destroying us if it is quashed. The need
therefore for a code which is acceptable to all parties is imperative and hope
the ongoing dialogue between Rights Holders and ISP’s produces such a
So... whilst there's some definate application of the law that's of benefit to say, a Video rental outfit, they're actually looking for a code which is 'acceptable to all parties'. Perhaps United Video havn't noticed the objections by such a large number of parties... ?
Their message would appear to be quite confused in that stake. Or doesn't 'all parties' include artists and innocent members of the public clobbered by poorly written legislation?
Even more amusing was their earlier paragraph, describing themselves as "the gatekeepers of entertainment technology as it reaches the rental marketplace" and they "as being a real link between the producers ofthe product and the end consumer." (which makes me laugh/choke/cry).
Brendas Tally is quite telling in itself.