Concern is coming from several directions over possible changes to Australian internet law.

Two related issues have emerged in recent days that are worry to open internet and consumer advocates.

Firstly, local spy agency ASIO is understood to be campaigning for almost unlimited access to Australian citizens’ ‘metadata’ – details and record of electronic communications.

Steve Dalby, chief regulatory officer at iiNet, said the security agency was asking for blanket access to too much information.

Mr Dalby said he had seen a confidential briefing paper from the Attorney-General's Department which included an extremely broad definition of ‘metadata’; extending beyond telephone records to include internet histories, email and internet telephony.

Metadata is usually consider to include the time, location, sender and receiver, of telephone and internet traffic.

Mr Dalby said there is still no clarification from the government on what it considers metadata.

He said compulsory data retention would come at a cost, dubbed the “surveillance tax”.

“iiNet does not agree that it should accept the role proposed by those calling for an onerous data retention regime,” Dalby said.

“If we are ultimately compelled by law to collect such data, the government must be responsible for its storage and protection,” he said.

“iiNet has no use for surveillance data, so there is no commercial driver to collect a massive volume of data, indexed to individuals, that we'll never use.”

Secondly - a draft discussion paper, leaked by news site Crikey, proposes a block overseas on websites found hosting pirated content and laws to force internet service providers (ISPs) to police their users’ downloads.

The proposals would go around a 2012 High Court decision that found ISPs including iiNet, Telstra and Optus are not liable for acts by their subscribers, such as infringing copyright.

But media firms and film production companies say illegal downloading poses a grave risk to the creative sector.

Matthew Rimmer, an expert in intellectual property at the Australian National University, has told reporters he is concerned by the paper's “radical” ideas.

He said they would make Australian anti-piracy laws the toughest in the world.

“These proposals amount to a punitive copyright protection regime that would put Australia beyond the United States, the United Kingdom and New Zealand,” Dr Rimmer told the Brisbane Times.

“The discussion paper looks like a wish list from Hollywood and the music industry.”

Consumer group Choise says that “if the Government is serious about addressing piracy, it needs to address the fundamental issues”.

“Australians often find it hard to gain access to content like movies and television, and when they do, they pay far too much compared to consumers in other countries,” says Choice’s Erin Turner.

“This issue was comprehensively examined by the IT Pricing Inquiry, which released its report – At what cost? IT pricing and the Australia tax – one year ago.

“Australians commonly pay around 50% more for software and other digital products like games and music. The IT Pricing Inquiry provided a bipartisan blueprint for reforms to address this price discrimination.

“The Government’s leaked anti-piracy discussion paper has missed the opportunity to deal with this problem—in fact, the paper explicitly says the Government does not want to receive comment on Australia tax issues.”