Australia's piracy crackdown is looking easier and easier to bypass Illustration: michaelmucci.com To the disappointment of rights holders, the code will not have to include tough penalties requested by some such as Village Roadshow, including throttled internet speeds for repeat offenders. As Fairfax Media revealed on Tuesday, the government will also enable rights holders to apply for a court order requiring ISPs to block access to overseas websites providing access to pirated content. Turnbull said he expected this would "materially" reduce unauthorised downloading. 'Not a filter'

"This is not, repeat, not an internet filter," Turnbull said when asked if it contradicted the Coalition's policy "There's no internet filter here at all. What on earth are you talking about?" It was "nonsense" and "complete BS" to suggest blocking websites was a filter, he said. Consumer group Choice rejected this. "In regards to the blocking scheme, it has the effect of filtering peoples' internet access," Erin Turner, a spokeswoman for Choice, said. "We think that anything that filters the internet can reasonably be called an internet filter, even if it is industry run. While we understand they don't want to refer to it in this way, if you regulate and restrict what people can see on the net, you're running an internet filter – plain and simple."

Conservative think tank the Institute of Public Affairs said changing the Copyright Act to enable website blocking was reviving Labor's internet filter. "The government's proposal to block websites that infringe copyright is an internet filter and a threat to free speech," said Chris Berg, senior fellow at the IPA. "This is nothing more than an internet filter, of the sort which the Coalition proudly opposed when it was proposed by the Rudd and Gillard governments," he said. "There is no reason to believe that this will reduce copyright infringement in any material way." Australian Greens senator Scott Ludlam also said it was a filter.

"The Greens will not support amendments to the Copyright Act to allow rights holders to apply for a court order requiring ISPs to block access to a website," Senator Ludlam said. "Such a move would be a de-facto internet filter and would allow rights holders to unilaterally require websites to be blocked. This kind of internet filter would not be effective at all, due to the widespread availability of basic VPN software to evade it." Mr Turnbull acknowledged this but said not many people used VPNs. Asked if internet costs would rise as a result of an industry or government code, he couldn't say. "It depends what the cost is, and what the ISPs have to share," Mr Turnbull said.

Shadow attorney-general and communications spokesman Mark Dreyfus and Jason Clare said in a joint statement that while action was needed to deter online piracy, the government's proposals would be ineffective. "The government's only concrete decision is to introduce legislation providing for overseas websites facilitating copyright infringement to be blocked in Australia by court order. Site-blocking is unlikely to be an effective strategy for dealing with online piracy. Pirated content is likely to reappear as quickly as it can be taken down," they said. Rights holders welcome proposals Graham Burke, co-chief of Village Roadshow, said he was "delighted" with the proposal. "This is a very good, balanced outcome," Mr Burke said.

He said costs should be split 50-50 with ISPs. "ISPs are the enablers [of unauthorised downloading]. They have come into our village and have put a toll road through it," he said. John Stanton, chief of the Communications Alliance, the industry body representing telcos, welcomed the "balanced" approach but said the time frame of four months to come to an agreement was "challenging". "But we think we can work within that," Mr Stanton said. Richard Freudenstein, chief executive officer of Foxtel, said the ability to block websites and issue warnings to internet users would help send a strong message that piracy was wrong. Jane van Beelen, Telstra's executive director of regulatory affairs, said the government's response to the issue of online infringement provided "a balanced legal framework within which all stakeholders can develop a flexible, fair and workable code" to reduce piracy.

"We stand ready to work with rights holders and other ISPs to implement these measures quickly, efficiently and with minimal impact on our customers," Ms van Beelen said. Murray St Leger, chief executive of the Copyright Agency, said action was long overdue. "A notice scheme might start a conversation around the dining-room table about what is the right thing to do for creators," he said. In a letter to stakeholders, Turnbull and Brandis said the industry code should: Require that ISPs take reasonable steps (including the development of an education and warning-notice scheme) to deter online copyright infringement on their network when they are made aware of it.

Inform consumers of the implications of copyright infringement and legitimate alternatives that provide affordable and timely content.

Provide appropriate safeguards for consumers.

Fairly share costs between ISPs and rights holders.

Ensure smaller ISPs are not unfairly or disproportionately affected.

Include a process to assist rights holders to take legal action against infringers after an agreed number of notices.