Slashdot Log In
Australia To Adopt U.S.-Style Copyright Laws
Posted by
timothy
on Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:56 AM
from the ossifying-officialdom dept.
from the ossifying-officialdom dept.
An anonymous reader submits "Australia has just announced that it has finalized a Free Trade Agreement with the United States. Included in the treaty is an agreement for Australia to implement American-style DMCA copyright laws, extensions to the term of copyright, and an agreement to move towards American-style patent and trademark laws (and we all know how well those work, don't we.) I suppose this is the misery-loves-company school of treaty negotiation."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Insightful)
One is also led to wonder what good ideas will be lost as testing of creative ways to deal wth modern problems could be in violation of treaties such as this one.
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Informative)
It's been happening for a while. The US had some perfectly reasonable copyright laws up until 1976, when we changed our laws so we could join the Berne convention. We changed our laws to "harmonize" with Europe. And then in 1995, Europe extended their laws from life+50 to life+70, and shortly thereafter [1996], the US extended its laws to match.
It's a crap trick that political and corporations play. Pass a law in one area, and then force other areas to pass similar laws to "harmonize". It's why other contries are getting their own versions of the DMCA
Do I even have to ask why instead of Australia extending their copyrights (they were/are a life+50 nation), the US doesn't scale back US laws to match Australia's?
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, actually, Australia (and New Zealand) have more open economies than you do.
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Informative)
It has already happened in many areas. Numerous treaties, including this one [wto.org], have helped make patents cross-border. The EU is a giant cross-border experiment, and systems like NAFTA, NATO, OPEC, and the Arabian and Asian trade pacts, reinforce things even more.
The UK is already experiencing a small form of one world government in terms of the European Union. European Union laws often override the old British ones entirely, particularly in areas relating to human rights. It's not going to be long before something like UN law overrides all others, and if it's like the UK.. we won't like it, but we'll fall over and accept it anyway.
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, this assumes that other countries even believe that the US's laws are bad, but they just have to take them. As much as you or I might hate the DMCA or Patriot act or something, there are people who *do* like them, in every country, not just the US. I wouldn't put it past other governments to use "america made us do it" as a reason to pass maybe unpopular laws that the legislators actually want.
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Insightful)
That geeks only are aware of it when it affects those few IP rules that they care about, is sort of sad.
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Beginning of a frightening trend? (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely correct. That seems to be the overwhelming perception here in Australia. If that was an Australian moderator marking that comment as a troll, you should get away from your computer for a few days and actuallly get outside and start talking to some people. In this country we do not so much vote for an Australian Government to govern us, as vote for a regional outpost of the United States administration who we hope will interpret American interests and policies in our favour.
Parent
Re:You brought it on yourselves. (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely fucking hilarious. The Australian posters on this board are all outraged that they're going to be forced to adopt U.S. style copyright laws, and that our government is nothing but a spineless U.S. puppet...and your insinuation is that by adopting more U.S. attitudes and laws, that will somehow make it all better? Maybe we needed to negotiate a free trade agreement on whatever it is that you're smoking right now.
"What?!? You don't like the taste of shit? I know how to fix that! Here's some more shit for you to eat!!"
Parent
You sir are wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Speaking as an Australian I can say that Australia is more accurately America's doormat.
Take for example this trade agreement. Australia could hardly get anything on agriculture, one of its biggest export areas and one where America's trade barriers really hurt. And yet we are still planning to sign it as a good deal. Personally I'm trying to work out how exactly this trade deal is going to help us at all. The farmers hate it and claim it sells out the farming industry (actually it's more like the status quo hasn't really changed ie. the deal gives almost zero benefits to farmers). The unions hate it and claims it sells out the manufacturing industry. The actors and TV producers hate it and claims it sells out the Australia movie and TV industry. The doctors are just relieved because they thought it could have been much worse (they thought PBS would be dismantled or crippled - it's still not clear whether it will be or not so the doctors are still worried). There are some vague rumblings of support from manufacturers but it seems more like some will benefit and some will be hit badly so it's a toss up whether manufacturing as a whole will benefit. Trust me, we're a doormat.
I mean geez, Howard, if you're going to send troops to Iraq to support an unpopular war, couldn't you at least get some financial benefit from it? And I thought he was a smart political operative. I guess his love of Bush (trust me even conservative Murdoch-owned newspapers here put in cartoons showing Howard worshipping Bush in bed) over-road his political smarts.
Parent
Re:You sir are wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Pisses me off too.
Its selective freetrade towards campaign contributors and its corruption to its core. Same is true with your government. Famers probably gave less to a conservative PM candidate and those who are in manufactoring and IP gave towards Murdochs campaign. They will hapilly now outsource your jobs away. But American farmers vote like you would not beleive and want high prices for American farming products via tarrifs so they can make more money.
Parent
Re:You sir are wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
During the lead up to the war, it was assumed by a lot of Australians that part of Howard's eagerness to get involved was due to an expectation of being rewarded with favourable terms in the upcoming trade agreement. I don't think he ever admitted that this was a motive, though.
What he did say quite explicitly, however, was that we needed to get involved in the Iraq invasion and occupation to show support to the USA in return for access to US intelligence data in the future. Is US intelligence data worth anything at all? Sometimes it amazes me how blatantly wrong and stupid our leaders can be, and how much of it we are willing to tolerate. Australians just don't seem to give shit.
Parent
Re:You sir are wrong. (Score:5, Funny)
Columbia?
You never hear them complaining about access to markets and free trade barriers.
-
Parent
Re:Offtopic: Shocking lack of financial benefits (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Offtopic: Shocking lack of financial benefits (Score:5, Insightful)
No, you are right, we should do it because it is the right thing to do. So, when does the war against Bush begin?
Joking aside, most of the people who criticize Bush and the war are making just your point, though you seem to have missed it: We belive they started the war for their own financial benifit, not because of the goodness of their hearts. After all, they don't mind vicious dictators anywhere else.
Parent
Howard: children overboard scandal (Score:5, Informative)
I seem to remember him admitting that the reason Australia was going to war was to help America. Helping the Iraqi people was never an issue. The Free Trade agreement was an issue that was repeatedly brought up by politicians and the media as well as the need for American military protection. Considering this he is stupid to send troops to war without guaranteeing economic and military benefits for Australia. He really is Bush's doormat.
Parent
Re:You sir are wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
What do you the the chances are that even one thousand people would protest IP harmoniZation?
Probably we will see a media release from EFA, but they are the "ultimate doctrinaire libertarians" [aph.gov.au] and not a word they say should be believed. (I'm quoting the former communications minister).
BTW, it's VB / MB / XXXX not fosters. :-)
Parent
Not through yet (Score:5, Interesting)
This may be 'finalised' but it has got to get through both houses of parliament, and in the run up to a close election, with any luck the Senate (the upper house) will eviscerate the "DMCA by stealth" approach. At least they didn't get to shaft the Australian pharmaceutical scheme, which the US pharmas desperately wanted to do, as it is very cheap and fair.
A link [abc.net.au] to the Australian Broadcasting Council news story on the same item.
Re:Not through yet (Score:5, Informative)
Um ... you might want to note the following from SMH [smh.com.au] today.
Quarantine standards would be downgraded, Americans would be able to circumvent investment rules and American drug companies would get the opportunity to override the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme that provides cheap drugs to Australians, the Greens said.
Parent
The US government pulled a fast one (Score:5, Interesting)
Australia is still mainly an exporter of agricultural goods (including enormous amounts of sugar and beef) and minerals, I live in one of the biggest cities in Australian and the biggest industry is probably tinning pineapples. As a result we'll get the DMCA for virtually no return, and the USA won't get a lot back because even at 10% less US manufactured goods are going to be more expensive than the asian equivalents of similar quality. About all the extra stuff the USA will be able to sell over here is agricultural goods.
Parent
Beef industry not so lucky (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope, not quite. From the SMH article [smh.com.au]:
Mr Crombie said even after the long phase-in period, Australian beef farmers would still fail to get free trade with the US.
"After a transition period we had expected that all beef tariffs and quotas would vanish," Mr Crombie said.
"In contrast, under the agreement beef quotas will remain in perpetuity.
"And although all tariffs are eliminated, safeguard provisions are in place.
"These will result in tariffs being reimposed if there is even a minor downward movement in US beef prices - a drop of 6.5 per cent."
So basically, after 18 years we get to sell the US another 70,000 tonnes of beef (equivalent to only two days of US beef production), and the tariffs will be right back where they started if US beef prices drop slightly (so we can't even compete in the market). What exactly does this give us?
My uncle happens to be a significant (Australian) beef producer, and when speaking to him a couple of days ago, he seemed quite optimistic about the FTA. I wonder if he still is today.
Parent
FTA not all it's cracked up to be (Score:5, Interesting)
Bad news indeed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bad news indeed (Score:5, Funny)
It'd be a ton of fun to lock a copyright nut like you and an anti-IP nut like Stallman in a room with observation windows and see what happens.
Parent
Don't think this mean going from good to bad (Score:5, Informative)
Do you think he ever got any of his stuff back? No chance. The police say they no longer have it, but aren't forthcoming about which copyright agency took possession of it. It shits me especially since he was borrowing one of my motherboards and drives at the time. All gone.
That was in 2000. There's no accountability now, I don't see this as making anything worse.
Re:Don't think this mean going from good to bad (Score:5, Interesting)
As I see it (as a lawyer), the key to this problem is that Australia was formed in peacetime by a group of what were essentially businessmen, or at least people mainly concerned with business and commerce. As such there is virtually nothing in our constitution, or our mentality, to protect the individual from the government. It was essentially left to the parliament to do whatever was deemed necessary in these respects - as the ASIO Bill and similar have shown, this is something far too important to be left to politicians.
IMHO, Australia is in a lot more danger than the US of succumbing to the parental state, not 1984 but definitely Brave New World-ish. People here just don't give a shit, and when it comes down to it it is the acquiescence of the general public that allows governments to behave in an authoritarian manner.
It's very depressing.
Parent
What about Gutenberg? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't imagine they will be able to recall public domain items back into copyright, but does this mean an end to the release of additional public domain works for the next 40 years (when current items released under the 50 year term reach the US level of 90 years)?
Re:What about Gutenberg? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why not? They did exactly that here in the USA, stole about 10 year's worth of stuff from the public domain and put it back under copyright.
Fuckers.
Parent
Write to your Members of Parlaiment *NOW* (Score:5, Informative)
Addresses here [aph.gov.au]. Don't forget the senate [aph.gov.au] as Greens and Labor together may defeat any required legislation.
Don't be abusive, but explain the problem clearly. Most pollies probably aren't even aware of how dangerous such moves are to Australia's well being.
PLEASE write to your MP/Senators (Score:5, Informative)
Australians are extremely apathetic about politics and most of you probably believe that writing to an MP will have no effect, but I assure you that we read everything that comes in and the Senator reads everything personally too. It only takes a few letters to make a real difference.
They say for each letter written to a newspaper there are 30,000 people with the same opinion who don't bother to write. Don't be one of them.
Focus your letter writing on:
- the Democrats
- the National Party
- the ALP
The government is too tightly controlling of its members for anyone to break ranks, except maybe the nationals. The Democrats are probably the most important players, and the Greens are unlikely to deal on this and the ALP will make a strategic decision.
Parent
Why can't anyone get it right? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the world becomes homogeneous we will lose out on the benefits of diversity. Europe became strong because it was so diverse. Once it and the rest of the world is thoroughly homogenized, the world will be a worlthless clump. It will never grow. Competition and diversity breeds success.
This will be great for the economy! (Score:5, Funny)
Wait a minute! Are we just following the lead of the British? Sending our worst criminals, the dregs of society, to Austrailia?
Don't do it Aussies! It's a trap!
the coming election(s) (Score:5, Funny)
Not another one... (Score:5, Insightful)
Australian IT have article (Score:5, Informative)
Containment (Score:5, Interesting)
Every time the US sneezes they pass their germs on to the rest of the world. Not that the US doesn't have its moments in the sun, but in Canada we see this happening far too often - US passes Law X so we must do the same.
The root cause is twofold: US pressure either directly or through unelected world organisations, and the knee jerk reaction of our own politicians.
The US which I personally view as one of the least democratic democracys, is effectively sabotaging democracy in the rest of the world, when it uses its influence to cause laws to be passed in other countries. This is a dangerous game in the long term. Undue influence on the policy in other democratic countries erodes democracy worldwide, and whatever George Bush may think, makes the world a little less safe in the longer term.
I sometimes wish I could boycott politicians like I do the RIAA :)
Who Is Interested in Networking Against This? (Score:5, Interesting)
The whole country could divided into regions, each consisting of 1000 people. That makes around 10,000 regions to cover all letterboxes in the country. We need to find 10,000 Internet connected sympathisers, one living in each region. These people join a mailing list. Material to be dropped is sent to this list (digitally signed for verification). Each person prints 1000 copies at their expense and delivers promptly to all 1000 letterboxes in their region.
The hardest thing will be to agree on the material to be distributed. It should not be extreme, but plainly and simply put forward, in an irrefutable way, that extentions to copyright are not in Australia's interest. Try to keep party politics out of it and keep to the issue.
I don't have the resources or know how to run such a mailing list. Any volunteers (preferably based in Australia)? I'm in Sydney. If lots of people step forward, it will be light work. I don't hae much time, but even if I help get this kick started, by prompting people to come forward, then step away (I'm going to try not to) from it I'll have done my bit.
If interested send mail to copyrightaustralia@yahoo.com [mailto]. Ideally the people who run this will not be into party politics, but will care passionately about copyright, IP and Australia's well being.
Apologies for the typos, but I am trying to get this out early to attract Slashdot's attention.
Re:Who Is Interested in Networking Against This? (Score:5, Interesting)
However, it's important to realise that Australian common law offers built-in protection against a lot of the worst of the DMCA. Common law exists to remove the need for laws to deal with highly-specific information. It's one of the reasons why we don't get the continual barrage of new legislation that the US seems to get to vote on every few weeks.
Common law pretty much equates to "common sense". As an example, AFAIK there have been no prosecutions for illegal recording of TV shows - that's because we acquired certain common law rights when we purchased a VCR and one of those is the ability to use the "record" button.
Australian common law also protects (IIRC) e.g. decompiling code for the purposes of creating interoperability - it's no coincidence that projects such as Samba were started in Australia, as they are legally protected via a common law right to "use something you've purchased in a reasonable manner" (OK, that's oversimplifying, but it's not far from truth).
AFAIK, common law would "trump" any DMCA-like law that was introduced. Common law is enshrined in the Australian Constitution, and that isn't likely to be tweaked to accomodate Johnny-come-lately stuff like DMCAs.
Common law is one of the reasons why there's no overwhelming push for a US-style Bill Of Rights in Australia; many things that would be covered by it are already covered by common law. Any introduction of a Bill Of Rights here would probably only create grey areas that don't currently exist. Although there's very little to actually prevent it, we also don't have governments subjected to massive and well-organised financial lobbying from interest groups (e.g. large companies); such lobbying in the US is primarily driven by a proposed transfer of rights from individuals to those interest groups, and common law protects us as individuals to the point where these lobby groups have no reason to exist here.
Oh, IANAL but I've dated a few... A useful reference on common law is at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/alta/alta95/
Parent
Singapore Already on board (Score:5, Informative)
See here: http://news.com.com/2100-1025-1000154.html
S.
The ACCC won't like this... (Score:5, Interesting)
They opposed the prosecution of the Sony mod-chipper - not for piracy reasons, but for competition reasons. Playstation games are cheaper in the US, and have more range in Japan.
They oppose region coding of DVDs - and as a result almost all Australian DVD players, even from the big companies, are region free out of the box. Same reasons, bigger range, more choice.
No matter what the U.S. wants, businesses in there have no force of law here - specifically the RIAA and friends.
This is par for the course. (Score:5, Insightful)
It may have been a little imprudent to say so in front of the media, but he was simply saying what alot of people were thinking at the time. Maybe if American politicians had the courage to be so forthright there wouldn't be DMCA or Patriot or IP lawyers mocking your most basic constitutional rights so flagrantly.
Speaking of which, the 'licker' comment was made during the lead up to the war in Iraq. The assertion was that if we supported the US in their little WMD wild goose chase, then we'd be favoured in the upcoming free-trade talks (not to mention post-war contracts). I guess they stiffed us on the free-trade!
My letter to DFAT (Score:5, Interesting)
I read with some concern that the Free Trade Agreement with the US will involve harmonising our intellectual property laws with the US, in particular with the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. This would be a disaster for innovation in Australia.
I refer you to the following paper, entitled "Unintended Consequences: Five Years under the DMCA" by the Electronic Frontier Foundation:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences .php [eff.org]
This paper describes the harm that has been done in the US to free speech, scientific research, and fair use since the DMCA's introduction. Introducing a similar law here would be devastating.
My own company, Southern Storm Software, Pty Ltd, would be directly affected by such as change. At present, Australian law protects those who reverse engineer a competitor's product for the purpose of interoperation. DMCA-style laws would make me a felon solely for trying to compete fairly in my chosen market.
I urge you to please reconsider, so that Australia remains competitive in the Information Technology industry, and does not become a victim of the large Copyright interests in the US who are not interested in true and open competition.
Name and address added.
http://www.southern-storm.com.au/ [southern-storm.com.au]
A sad day... (Score:5, Interesting)
When this was first mentioned [slashdot.org], I spent some time reading up on the topic: I might as well share some links here.
The only organisation that I could find actively lobbying against the dilution of Public Domain rights in Australia was Australian Library and Information Association [alia.org.au], a professional organisation for librarians. They are following [alia.org.au] this issue, and may appreciate your input and support; their online journal also contains an insightful article [alia.org.au] by an Australian National University professor of law on copyrights and public domain.
As other have pointed out, the retrospective extension of copyrights from Life+50 to Life+70, which even those advocating a longer copyright term admitted had no justification [allenconsult.com.au], is of particular concern to Project Gutenberg of Australia [gutenberg.net.au] (site seems to be down at present--anyone know why?), which had published a number of until now Public Domain works on their site (for instance, the works of George Orwell). There's already some discussion of this on Distributed Proofreaders [pgdp.net] (registration may be required)--if you're a DP'er, you might like to contribute, and if you're not a DP'er, you should be.
HTH
Maybe it's not all irretrievably bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article:
Tighter controls on circumventing technological protection of copyright material together with a mechanism for examining and as necessary introducing public interest exceptions in relation to technological protection measures, along with a transition period to provide the opportunity for public submissions in this area, as well as other measures in relation to circumvention tools
From this paragraph, it appears that the government would actually like to hear what the problems are with legislation that outlaws software that might potentially be used to infringe others "intellectual property". At least they are aware that this may cause problems, and I see this as a good thing.
So, Australian
All that is required for evil to flourish is that good men only rant on Slashdot (or something).
misunderstanding (Score:5, Informative)
There is a fundamental misunderstanding here. People say "adopt DMCA style laws". The fact is that these laws (now enacted by the US, EU and other countries) are the result of the WIPO Internet Copyright Treaties agreeded upon in the late 1990's (1998 if I remember correctly).
What this means is that these countries long ago signed up to the treaty, it just takes a few years for legislative changes to be introduced and have effect.
Re:The Austrailian Constitution? (Score:5, Interesting)
The gun lobby's insistence on our constitutional right to bear arms is the most amusing. Most of them know we have no such 'constitutional right' in Australia, but they'll still quote it because it sounds good to themselves.
Parent
Our constitution (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:The Austrailian Constitution? (Score:5, Insightful)
As of late, governments are discovering that getting on with their business of the day becomes far easier if things like their Constitution, the rule of law, human rights, additional rights of the people, basic decency, and respect for human dignity are entirely ignored. Thus, men are no longer ruled by ideals or laws, but by the whims of those who happen to be in power at any given time. Luckily, we've become sufficiently advanced, militarily, that the revolutions of old which had always corrected such problems are no longer possible.
Let's hear it for progress, ladies and gentlemen.
Parent
Re:The Austrailian Constitution? (Score:5, Informative)
Well actually, we do, technically. Queen Anne's Bill of Rights [yale.edu] of 1689 is still on the books, inherited from English Law. Some quotes:
Oh, you thought the US invented this concept? The "Founding Fathers" had a very flexible definition of Copyright.The Australian Constitution is available on the web [aph.gov.au] (Naturally), and a casual read will show that it's been heavily inspired by the US one of over 100 years earlier. We like to think ours is better, but YMMV.
Parent
Re:Har har har (Score:5, Informative)
why do you think we send it overseas?
dms0
Parent