I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".
The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Copyright Act, 1963 to increase the penalties for breach of copyright provided for in that Act.
Copyright protects all kinds of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, including sound recordings, cinematograph films and broadcasting against unauthorised copying or pirating. The Copyright Act, 1963 provides that owners of copyright protect their rights by civil actions. There is, however, provision for certain penalties in the criminal law. Section 27 creates offences in respect of the making, sale, hire, public exhibition, importation, except for private and domestic use, and the distribution of infringing copies of a work. Offences are also created in respect of the making of, or possessing, a plate for making infringing copies and in respect of causing an infringing performance of a work to be given in public.
In the case of the offences relating to the first category which I have mentioned, the penalties provided are, on first conviction, a £5 fine for each infringing article and, on subsequent convictions, the same fine or six months imprisonment, subject to a maximum fine of £100 in respect of articles comprised in the same transaction. For offences relating to the making of, or possessing, a plate for making infringing copies, or the causing of an infringing performance of a work to be given in public, the penalties are, on first conviction, a fine of £100 and, on subsequent convictions, the same fine or six months imprisonment.
The Act provides for prosecution by summary proceedings only and the Bill before the House does not alter this position. The Bill, however, substantially increases the amount of the fines to which I have just adverted by the substitution of £50 and £800 for the £5 and £100 fines.
The Bill also provides for the imposition, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, of a six months term of imprisonment as an alternative to or in addition to the new fine. This is an added deterrent as the existing legislation only permits of a fine or a term of imprisonment. The objective of these increased penalties for which the Bill provides is to combat piracy of copyright works, particularly — this is most relevant in these times — through the medium of video tapes.
As the House is aware, section 27 of the Act contains provisions about seizure and search for infringing copies of copyright works. If the District Court is satisfied by information on oath that there is reasonable ground for suspecting that an offence is being committed on any premises, the Court may grant a search warrant authorising a member of the Garda Síochána to enter the premises, if need be by force, and to seize any copies of any work or any plates in respect of which he has reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence is being committed.
The Act also provides that the District Court, if satisfied by evidence that there is reasonable ground for believing that infringing copies of a copyright work are being hawked, carried about, sold or offered for sale, may by order authorise a member of the Garda Síochána to seize the copies without warrant and to bring them before the court which may order them to be destroyed or delivered up to the owner of the copyright.
I believe that the increased penalties proposed in the Bill, coupled with the existing provisions in the legislation relating to seizure and search for infringing articles, will go a long way to meet the problems being caused particularly for cinemas, film distributors and legitimate video dealers whose businesses are being damaged at present by the operations of video pirates.
The additional provision enabling the courts to impose both fines and imprisonment terms is intended as a strengthened deterrent to counter the more serious copyright infringement activities which deprive the rightful owners of copyright in the works concerned of the royalty payments that are their due. It is apparent that employment in the cinema industry is being eroded by the present upsurge of illegal screenings of video films. The persons who engage in these unlawful activities often obtain pre-recorded cassettes produced by film makers specifically for private use and show them in public without the authority of the producer or copyright owner. Alternatively, these lawbreakers may get illegally copied cassettes at cheap rates. These could be of an inferior quality which do not reflect the full artistry and technical skills put into the original work by the producer which cost him perhaps many millions of pounds to make.
It is claimed by interests in the cinema industry that recent well-known films, such as Gandhi, E.T. and Tootsie, had country-wide distribution in Ireland on illegal video tapes. This is a situation of serious concern both financially for the cinema trade and because of the employment implications for that trade.
Illegal video cassettes are also a matter of concern to legitimate video dealers who can show that pirated copies are circulated before the films from which they are copied are issued for general release to the cinemas in the State. This leads to serious loss of sales of legitimate tapes. It is a matter of concern to the Government that pirate cassettes carry no royalties for legitimate business interests, and VAT or corporation tax are not paid to the Exchequer. I understand from figures made available to me that a pirate cassette can be produced for as little as £8 and sold at up to £29, a profit of £21.
It must not be overlooked that the central concept of our copyright legislation is that enforcement of their rights is a matter for copyright owners themselves to pursue through the courts. This has, in fact, been happening.
The increased penalties contained in this Bill will strengthen the hand of legitimate interests in protecting their rights and accordingly I recommend the Bill for the approval of the Dáil.
I regard this legislation as quite important for the development of legitimate film making. Many of us here in the House will be aware that very considerable costs are involved in making a film and we have been trying here in Ireland, so far with only relatively modest success, to develop a native film industry. Clearly it is very important for the development of a native film industry that people who invest their time and money in making a film would feel that they would be able to achieve an income from that film in the form of royalties from the display in public of the film. Present copyright legislation does not provide an adequate assurance of a return to the film maker for the very substantial expenditure he will have undertaken in making a film.
I regard this legislation not just as undoubtedly necessary to protect existing rights but also as providing a useful foundation for the development of a native film industry here. I regard the possibility of the development of a native film industry in Ireland as quite considerable. The marked success of the Australian film industry from very modest beginnings is clearly an indication of what is possible in this area. All that is necessary is for one to get a reputation for being a source of good films on the basis of a number of good products and one can see quite quickly the development of an industry here and the development of an anxiety by people who have film scripts and ideas to have those films made in the country where success has been marked. Also worth noting in the case of Australia is that many of the films produced there have been based on insights into the Australian way of life and I am sure that we also have much to recommend us in this regard as a base for film making. I hope to give considerable attention to this in the future.
As I mentioned earlier, the present Bill is concerned, inter alia, with the pirating of films for which increased fines are being provided. When I was considering this matter during the preparation of the Bill it occurred to me that it would be desirable to have a national repository where copies of all films of Irish interest could be kept. Shortly I will be having discussions with the Irish Film Board about the details of such a film deposit arrangement. The Irish Film Board Act, 1980, has a provision enabling the board to engage in such an activity.
Before concluding, I should inform the House that I am considering a few other legislative provisions which I hope to finalise shortly and to deal with by way of amendment on Committee Stage of this Bill. I have still to settle the terms in consultation with the Attorney General, but I will arrange that the necessary amendments will be circulated well in advance of Committee Stage, if they are to be circulated, to give other Deputies in the House an adequate opportunity of considering them.