Australia-U.S. Trade Agreement Takes First Strike

inflex writes "With the recent AU-US Federal trade ageement coming into force, the first signs of what is to come have started appearing with Sony unleashing a legal bid to clamp down on previously legal mods chips in Australia."

Bend over Aussies and...

.. spread those checks for the bald eagle.

Those FBI warnings at the start of some movies are now not a joke - a branch office will be opening soon.

Also expect some law suits from Americans about the product you guys sell as "beer".

Re:Bend over Aussies and...

Yes. Next on our list of things to do is replace our Prime Minister with a speaker connected to a microphone in your US senate buildings.

Re:Bend over Aussies and...

I'd have moderated that one +1 Cold Hard Truth.

If there's any Australians who still think Free Trade with the US is a good thing, just ask their largest trading partner how free trade has helped with softwood lumber [buildingonline.com], hogs [axcessnews.com], wheat [aberdeennews.com], or anything else for that matter.

For those unfamiliar with the process:

1. Blame Canada
2. Impose tariff
3. Ignore NAFTA rulings that don't support the tariff
4. ???
5. Profit

NAFTA was supposed to reduce trade barriers, but has only made them much worse. Push for binding arbitration in your FTA if you can't get out of it now. They will not listen to trade commissions, they make more money collecting the tariffs than they lose paying penalties.

Re:Bend over Aussies and...

Also expect some law suits from Americans about the product you guys sell as "beer". Unfair competition?

Re:Bend over Aussies and...

Also expect some law suits from Americans about the product you guys sell as "beer".

Yes, our scientists are already talking to the American scientific community to find out how much H20 should be added to our beer so it can comply with the Budweiser specification.

Re:Bend over Aussies and...

Offices in the US and US patten/copyrights make it in thier best interest and include them in US law.

One of the key things about this us-au trade agreement was that It sort of imposed US lawe on AU. This might make it possible for any company from anywere else in the world claim assests being sold in AU fall under these laws even if they do not have any presence in the US. This hole ordeal kind of skips the process of AU making the laws and almost importing all of americas.

Here we go again

trying to outlaw technology just because it CAN be used for bad things. Without the mod chip, I wouldn't be able to import games. I don't know how me importing games is bad for Sony.

Re:Here we go again

Well if it's a game you can't get where you are, then no it's not really bad for them... but if it is one you could get where you are, then it hurts them because you are bypassing their region strategic pricing... (unless, of course, you get it from somewhere more expensive, but er... I'll assume not).

Re:Here we go again

I agree with you, it's silly and ultimately counterproductive, like DVD region coding. However, Sony's position does have some nugget of sense to it: if there is widespread importation of a particular game, or even the perception of it, Sony will be in a weaker negotiating position when they talk terms with foreign distributors/publishers since the potential market will be smaller. The distributors can say, "Well, the rabid fans have already imported, so we won't be able to market the game at as high an initial price." Sony may have to offer deeper wholesale discounts to make it worth the distributors' while to sell to fewer people or at a lower retail price. That may equal less money in Sony's coffers (depending on whether there's enough profit from the import orders to make up the difference.)

Whether that's what happens in real life, who knows? But it's easy to see why they might be afraid of it happening.

Too bad for Sony

"Sony will be in a weaker negotiating position when they talk terms with foreign distributors/publishers "

So what?

Really, I can't imagine why this is the general public's concern. I certainly can't imagine why its the job of the Australian government to make sure Sony is in the best negotiating position with local distributors.

It's definitely bad for Sony

If you don't buy your Sony games locally, you undercut Sony's ability to gouge on local game prices locally. And from what I've heard, video game companies seem to gouge on local game prices in Australia quite a bit.

It's all about protecting corps, such as Sony, from the effects of global capitalism; market forces are bad for profits, so technological and legal barriers to their proper operation must be put in place. Modern corporatism demands that only corporations get to benefit from globalization, never consumers.

Re:Here we go again

Write Sony a letter.

If I am having to write letters to privately held corporations if I want to express displeasure with the laws that are being applied to me, something is very, very, very wrong.

crazy

Great, so these chips themselves don't violate any copyrights, they just allow you to use your console as though it were a computer. Yes you can pirate software on a computer and you pirate software on a modded console--so what? Do the manufacturer's really have a right to say that you can only use content licensed from them on a machine you bought? Hell no. Unless they make you sign a contract and that is a term, then no, this is insane.

Sorry...

Do the manufacturer's really have a right to say that you can only use content licensed from them on a machine you bought? Hell no. Unless they make you sign a contract and that is a term, then no, this is insane.

I think you're confusing the way things should be with the way things actually are.

A reasonable agreement

was already given the last time. It was also nothing to do with piracy either. They had seen that SONY were creating an artificial trade barrier, why would the new law change their minds and hand a victory to SONY. Surely it cannot make that much of a difference, not when the original verdict was far more insightful than what SONY was portraying because it had nothing to do with piracy.

Site is loading slloooooooowwwlllly

Here's the text:

Sony in push to outflank PS2 mods
Andrew Colley
MARCH 15, 2005
SONY Computer Entertainment Australia is planning a new legal bid to outlaw PlayStation modification chips following recent changes to federal copyright laws.

The devices override copy control mechanisms Sony builds into its consoles to block the use of pirated games and DVDs encoded for players built to operate in other regions.

Launching the Gran Turismo 4 game in Sydney last week, SCEA managing director Michael Ephraim said the company had instructed its lawyers to prepare a new court challenge to the legality of the devices.

The case would be based on amendments to the Copyright Act flowing from the US Free Trade Agreement in January, he said.

Sony's lawyers were preparing the case in anticipation of a High Court appeal overturning a decision in its favour, based on previous laws, handed down by the full bench of the Federal Court in July 2003.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mr Ephraim said "the company would take more steps to crack down on street-level piracy in the second half of the year.

"We will wait for the outcome of the Stevens case.

However, Mr Ephraim said, "the world has changed a lot".

"So we will continue our fight against chipping on the PS2."

SCEA has engaged in a long series of legal manoeuvres to outlaw the chips since 2002 when it took legal action against backyard mod chip supplier, Eddy Stevens, in the Federal Court.

Sony asked the court to interpret parts of the Copyright Act outlawing the devices that circumvent copy protection mechanisms to include mod chips that Mr Stevens was selling.

However, Justice Ronald Sackville ruled in favour of Mr Stevens after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission intervened in the case.

The competition watchdog argued that Sony was using the copy control mechanism to erect artificial trade barriers between Australian consumers and overseas games and DVD markets.

Sony eventually won its case on appeal to the full bench of the Federal Court in July 2003. However, on February 8 Mr Stevens appealed to the High Court to overturn the decision.

Mr Stevens's legal representative, Gadens Lawyers, said the High Court had not set a date to give its decision.

DMCA == trade barriers

From the article:

However, Justice Ronald Sackville ruled in favour of Mr Stevens after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission intervened in the case. The competition watchdog argued that Sony was using the copy control mechanism to erect artificial trade barriers between Australian consumers and overseas games and DVD markets.

Really? No kidding? It seems to me like erecting trade barriers has been the only use of the DMCA and related copyright legislation's restriction on copy control mechanisms. DVDs and region coding/CSS, Lexmark and printer cartridges, Sony and modchips. Can someone please give me a valid instance of the DMCA's copy control mechanism clauses being invoked in a case that didn't involve keeping a potential competitor out of a specific market?

I am Jack's Total Lack of Suprise

I think anyone who's been keeping up to date with international agreements could see this coming a mile away. Australia is just the latest in a series of countries that have signed up for a Free Trade Agreement with the United States and received a bonus kick in the nuts to their copyright laws.

As an Australian, however, it's a lot more personal. I read /. I keep up to date on stuff like this. I sent letters to all political parties about this, with little success. My problem is this: I can talk to the politicians, but in an issue such as this, which politician will stand on principles to block the copyright amendments and subject themselves to "blocking Australian jobs" and other, more emotionally-laden epithets?

We know why the copyright amendments are in there; the USA is willing to sacrifice protectionism in a few key markets for a bigger stick on copyright. The USA wins: they get to stop the popular-but-expensive subsidies, while being popular in the electorate for their copyright stance.

The other country, my country, thinks it's getting a good deal, but ends up with an Intellectual property deficit. The politicians don't care - they reap the political benefits now.

Sorry for the rant. I guess it's just sour grapes - one would think that after helping the US with that crazy War on Terror thing, that we'd at least get the courtesy of lube before the big event.

Re:I am Jack's Total Lack of Suprise

The effects of reduced freedom in the realm of "intellectual property" and a starved public domain take decades to manifest themselves. The effects of a free trade agreement take a shorter time to manifest, and are much more visible to the electorate. It's clear why politicians would pass such a thing.

The main problem with modern democracy is career politicians. In America (at least), legislators act with their main focus on getting reelected to do the same thing again. Someone who is serving their country for a guaranteed term length is less likely to pander to the electorate while harming the public good since there would be less, if anything, to gain from it. The term can either be limited or unlimited in length and still reap these benefits. Unlimited, guaranteed terms work for the American Supreme Court, and I think limited, guaranteed terms would work for legislatures. There would have to be ways to impeach them if shit hit the fan, of course.

It's too bad that it'd be the legislatures that would have to bring this change in the first place.

When you make trade agreements with America

Funny how this mutual trade agreement doesn't make those mod chips legal in the U.S too, isn't it?

And again

You can tell me what i can do to my legaly purchased goods all you want ,the fact is im not going to listen if it comes into effect where i live , Its called civil disobediance .
The fact is people buy products not licenses to use them in this case , mod chips are illegal because they potentialy could enable the use of pirate games.
now lets look at the logic here ,
If i am going to use an illegaly cloned game i bought at some back street store or got online , do you think i would have any qualms about also getting a modchip sent to me and installing it, the simple awnser is
"Probbaly not ".
Now if i wanted to modify my console to turn it into someform of server , or homebrew test kit for making my own games then i may just think twice .
The real reason they dont want people doing this is not the piracy issue as they know that people will pirate anyway and this will only make it a tiny bit more inconveniant .
The real reason i belive is that of two things , They profit from Games sales not hardware(thus homebrew is a problem or could potentialy be int he future , and people turning it into something else) and the fact that region encoding is not an anti piracy mesure but a way to make sure people dont benifit from better prices in difrent regions.

TO bring out an old addage i have used many times before , Are Guns illegal as they facillitate murder which is infact the sole purpose of handguns (to kill),In most countrys Yes it is illegal for a person to own a gun but not to mod a console, In America however no .
I wont get into the gun ownership debate , but i will say this Please have equal standerds , the same applys to P2P programs , just because they may be used to break the (civil)law , it dosn't mean they should be illegal.
Mod chips , just as guns and Beer and bread knifes may all be used to break the law .
They also may all be used to respectivly , Install linux on your xbox or so on ,Um cant think of one for guns ... maybe hunt... And Spread butter on your bread.

It should also be noted...

In other signs of what is to come with the AU-US Federal trade agreement coming into force, actor Paul Hogan of the "Crocodile Dundee" movies has been removed to an undisclosed location and beaten to death with large stones.

Damn it

The ACCC should have forced Sony to make a PS2 that had no copy control in it. They should also force the same on Xbox and DVD playing devices. For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, our consumer watchdog agency intervened in the PS2 mod chipping case stating that mod chipping must be legal as without it Australians can't by games from overseas to play on our PS2. As most games are released overseas before they are released here and games are often priced hirer here than they are to import, the ACCC ruled this was an artificial trade barrier.

They should have taken a harder stance, now we're gunna get fucked over by the stupid trade agreement.

Re:But...

I bought my PS2 in London when I was living there the past 3 years, Ive now returned (to Sydney) and want to buy and play legit games that are sold at my local stores. WTF should I buy a new console when a mod chip will do the job? I guess im the 0.01% your talking about but thats no reason I should get shafted.

Re:Personal experience (complete text this time)

I was personally questioned by the french police and my flat was raided 10 years ago when Nintendo France made a lawsuit for the SNES/SFC game copy machines (the nice thing that plugged in the cartridge port and had ram and a floppy drive). So the police searched my flat while I was away, seized around 5 copy machines, about 50 games on floppies, my 2 computers and all they thought was of interest, besides that they emptied the trash in the bathtub and let it like that, it was nice when I came back home from holidays 2 weeks after that... So I had to go to Paris to talk to the police and explain myself, of course I was importing the copy machines from Hong Kong and selling them in France, the only problem for the police was that I was doing this in an "open" way, sending the goos by FEDEX "game copy machine" written on the customs decalaration and paying the customs and VAT tax. First they told me I was questioned for "importation of material being used for illegal copying" but when I showed them the customs paper they changed this to "selling of pirated games" arguing that I HAD to give games when I was selling a unit, at the time we had a pre internet way of coimmunicating in France called minitel, basically a chat BBS with incredible speed (1200/75) and so they had minitel logs of my conversations with buyers, but since I NEVER sold games after 2 hours they had to let me go, give me ALL my stuff back and pay for the damages they had caused in my flat... Bottom line is that since the modchip or device can be used for private copying and so on, it's going to be VERY difficult to put someone who's not selling pirated games in jail, at least in France, and even with the P2P hype, the judges are starting to realise that and the situation is MUCH more calm than it was 6 months ago... Now how is the law and the judges in an hysteric environment such as Fox news-USA and Murdoch land is another question...