The document compares internet policies in Australia and New Zealand, highlighting key differences in handling offensive content, hate speech, copyright laws, and surveillance. Australia has stricter regulations, including a filtering regime and detailed copyright laws, while New Zealand operates without formal content filtering or copyright legislation. Both countries share similarities in defamation laws and the enhancement of government agency authorities.

1. The comparison of the internet policies in Australia and New Zealand Siyao Liu z3387964 Jiuling Cheng z3342642 Xidan Zhang z3342832

2. Australia and New Zealand Overview VS Offensive Content Hate Speech Copyright Defamation Surveillance New Zealand

3. Differences Offensive Content strict filter regime(AU) VS no filtering scheme (NZ) Hate Speech no investigation system (AU) VS an institutionalized investigation system (NZ) Copyright Copyright Laws & Judiciary Enforcement (AU) VS no formal copyright legislation( NZ )

4. Similarities Defamation Expand jurisdicion outside Surveillance Enhance the authority of government agencies

5. Offensive Content Australia: R18 – Contains content that is likely to be disturbing to those under eighteen. This content is not prohibited on domestic hosting sites if there is an age-verification system certified by the ACMA in place. X18 – Contains nonviolent sexually explicit content between consenting adults. This content may be subject to ACMA takedown provisions if hosted on domestic servers. RC – Contains content that is Refused Classification (child pornography, fetish, detailed instruction on crime, and so on)and is prohibited on Australian-hosted sites.

6. EXAMPLE social media guideline Offensive content on the BLOG.

7. New Zealand : No explicit legal mechanism for the take-down of objectionable material. Instead, the nonprofit InternetNZ is in the process of establishing an industry wide code of conduct that would require its signers to agree not to host illegal content. The government focuses its efforts on prosecuting the distributors or possessors.

8. COPYRIGHT IN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND Australian ’s copyright law more stricter than those of New Zealand Australia’s copyright laws: Following the acceptance of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement in 2004, Australia was required to bring its copyright laws closer in line with those of the United State

9. Australia’s copyright laws Key points Copyright protection is free and applies automatically when material is created. There is NO registration system for copyright in Australia. Copyright does not protect ideas, information, styles or techniques. Copyright does not protect names, titles or slogans. There are no general exemptions from copyright law for non-profit organisations. There are some situations where copyright law allows people to use copyright material without permission for their own personal use, but these are narrow and specific. Generally, Australian copyright law applies to actions that take place in Australia, even if the material used was created or first published in another country.

10. New Zealand’s copyright laws: New Zealand is party to various international agreements, including: The Agreement on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement) (Annex 1C to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organisation(WTO) 1994); The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 1928(Rome Act revision); The Universal Copyright Convention 1952

11. Question Time Do you think Australia Internet Law is more rigor so that it is bring some troubles about finding more information during your research? Do you think Australia should imitate New Zealand that do not restrict digital area to people so that they can easily share information by Internet? Do you have any experience about using or reading offensive content surfing Internet?

12. References: Allan Swann, “Entire Copyright Act to Be Scrapped,” National Business Review, May 1 2009, < http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/entire-copyright-act-be-scrapped-101820> Cheng J 2007, “Report: 80 percent of blogs contain ‘offensive content’”, Ars technica, view on 16 Sep. 2011, < http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2007/04/report-80-percent-of-blogs-contain-offensive-content.ars> S impson Grierson, “Say No Evil: Defamation in Cyberspace,” FindLaw, < http://www. findlaw.com/12international/countries/nz/articles/852.html >

13. References: Davison, Mark J; Ann Louise Monnotti & Leanne Wiseman (2008). Australian intellectual property law. Cambridge University Press. p. 180. ISBN 9780521613385. Electronic Frontiers Australia, “Defamation Laws and the Internet,” January 14, 2006, http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html Electronic Frontiers Australia, “Comments on the Surveillance Devices Bill 2004,” May 18, 2004, < http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/completed_ inquires/2002-04/surveillance/submissions/sub8.pdf >

14. Thank you !