Australian Media 'Crooks' to Come in from the Cold

pagefault writes "News.com is reporting that millions of Australians who tape TV shows and copy CDs will soon get the right to do it with a clear conscience. From the article: 'The Federal Government will next year legalize the video recording of television shows for personal use, and the transfer of songs from CDs to MP3 players, in a bid to overturn a ban which has made criminals of much of the population."

Everyone's a criminal!

If everyone does it, then maybe its not so illegal.

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

They were a penal colony founded on crimials, but their nation was definitely NOT founded on a basis of criminality, regardless of what the british thought at the time.

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

You're forgetting that Australia is a nation that was founded by criminals. They are truly a nation where everyone was once a criminal.

And more to the point, many of the people originally shipped to Australia were convicted of offences which would be considered barely criminal today, like stealing a loaf of bread (or copying a CD?).

I wonder if any of the convicts on the First Fleet were sent over for stealing music? Sneaking into a concert hall for example?

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

You're forgetting that Australia is a nation that was founded by criminals. They are truly a nation where everyone was once a criminal.

And America was founded by puritans. Australians are forever grateful that we got the better deal.

Back to reality, Australia was neither founded by criminals nor was everyone once a criminal. Australia was founded by the British as a penal colony. God bless America for doing a bang up job on your education.

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

It's interesting that nearly EVERY comment is about Australia being founded by criminals. Do they teach nothing more than that in other places around the world?

What about the fact that it's the country (a government department no less!) that invented 802.11g?

What about the fact that a hell of a lot of healthcare stuff is started in Australia?

I remember reading something a while ago about the bionic ear was an Australian invention, and probably a ton of other stuff...

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

Well, in America, we also know that you all love wrestling crocodiles and drinking Foster's beer. ;-)

Seriouly, Australia looks like a really cool place, and most Australian folks I know are super nice people. I'm thinking of moving there someday. The "Australia founded by criminals" is just an interesting story that gets propagated because of its novelty, I don't think that people mean it as an insult. At least, I can assure you that my own opinion of Australia isn't tainted by the story.

After all, let's not forget that the United States was founded by a bunch of insurgents. Funny how our own opinions of insurgencies have changed...

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

Actually, we don't drink Foster's beer, we export it to people who ARE willing to drink it. Ha.

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

Drink it ? Is that what you're supposed to do with it ?
I use it to kill weeds and small children.

Re:Everyone's a criminal!

Do they teach nothing more than that in other places around the world?

That's just a stereotype picked up from TV. The stuff about Australia that's taught in schools in the rest of the world is quite different. In fact, just for reference I'm putting the entire history of Australia that's taught in the US in the remainder of this comment:

A change in legal status only.

I don't think anyone's going to be breathing a sigh of relief because the law seemed both unenforced and unenforcable. If it really made criminals of most of the population, then the average citizen probably didn't worry about this law much, if at all.

OTOH, I like seeing Australia taking a more friendly stance on this. Although the change will mean very little for the citizens, it's a message that they're declaring this stance instead of leaving it de facto.

Re:A change in legal status only.

Although the change will mean very little for the citizens, it's a message that they're declaring this stance instead of leaving it de facto.

Actually, it could mean a lot if it prevents things like the broadcast flag [wikipedia.org].

Moral vs Legal

I seriously doubt someone had unclear conscience while trying to copy his own CD-s to his own mp3 player.
Again brainwashing in action to make what's moral and what's legal the same thing.

If they outlaw living should I have bad conscience for being alive?

Just wait a year or two

[US President]: Hey, I hear that you are letting your minions copying CDs down there. You do remember the agreement we had right?
[AUS President]: huh?
[US President]: The FREE trade agreement?
[AUS President]: Oh yeah, I forgot. Don't worry, should be fixed in a jiffy. Btw, I got to get back to Australia in a week. The people seems to get a bit worried when their president is away for more than a few months.
[US President]: Ok, I guess I can replace you with an intern. Go ahead and get out from underneath my desk.

All hail to our Yanky overlords. I, as an Australian, welcome our inclusion into the United States of America as its newest state. I also welcome renaming our parliament to "Congress" and our Prime Minister to "President". One can only hope that the states will outsource its prison facilities over here.

Not criminals!

Just to insert a little sanity here. In Australia, most copyright violations are prosecuted in the civil courts (exceptions include sale of couterfeit goos, called 'passing off'). It is only in corrupt countries where the media corporations can easily buy new laws that such things have fallen under criminal prosecution.

Let's not even begin to talk about the DCMA, the shiny new laws which make videotaping a movie in a theatre more heavily punished than several types of killing, or the perpetual copyright on Mickey Mouse or anything else that american corporations bother to pay supreme court justices for.

But what about the 'FREE trade agreement'?

Having spent a fair bit of time eyeballing the intellectual property provisions of the FTA back when I was living in Australia (and thus more concerned about it than I am now), I was pretty sure that we've agreed to criminalise copying CDs (or was that bypassing Technical Prevention Measures (TPMs) which are increasingly common these days). Anyway, we're confusing the issues. We SHOULD be able to copy CDs for our own purposes (I'd much rather carry an iPod with my entire collection than a backpack of CDs, many of which are irreplacible). We SHOULD NOT be able to steal music using P2P software et al. The cost of criminalising the former in the name of preventing the latter is too great.

We also did some other stupid things to ensure 'justice' prevailed, including telling judges how to do their job by insisting that they consider the retail value of copies even if that is not realised (ie if your 10y/o son downloads the latest Disney tripe, selling at the time for AUD50 as a DVD, and it sits in [insert your favourite P2P software here] for 6 months during which time 100,000 copies are made then you are to be tried for AUD5,000,000 of piracy despite having nothing to show for it but an AUD10,000 Telstra bill).

There I go confusing the issues again... downloading from P2P networks IS theft (even in a world where CD/DVD prices are extortionate); making the most of your intellectual property license (ie CD/DVD purchase) by transforming the work into more convenient formats is not.

Re:weeeed

but i'm not alowed to walk around with 3 oz of weed 20 pills and a dash of nutmeg


I hear the Canadian government is set to legalize nutmeg. You should look into immigrating.

Re:Pathetic

rtfa :

n Canada, where similar laws have been introduced, a fee was levied on blank CD and iPod unit sales to compensate copyright owners with up to an extra $32 being placed on the store price of individual machines. Mr Ruddock's spokeswoman said a simil

Tax? What tax?

I mean, I live in Canadam, and I can buy a spindle of 50 blank CDRs for 8.99 CDN or so on sale, 50 DVDs for 9.99. Thats 18 measly cents a disc for CDRs or 20 cents a disc for DVDs... its even less for DVDs if you figure it per GB. The levy is pretty much irrelevant.

Re:Pathetic

Surely a blatant attempt by the media companies to get back at Apple for refusing to allowing to gouge the consumer even more by the 99c/song price.

Perhaps you meant AU$1.69?

Re:Any Enforcement?

Nah, they were rarely enforced. Most people don't know they exist, and that's fair enough, because you assume if you buy a CD you have the right to make a copy of it for yourself. That makes sense. The laws against it don't. It's only with the rise of portable MP3 players that the media has picked up on the fact that, before the recent opening of the Australian iTunes store, there was almost no legal use for an iPod in Australia, yet they were selling in their thousands.

Re:Any Enforcement?

"These laws" are just Australia's standard copyright legislation. Our "fair use" rights don't include time shifting. It's just the way it's always been but has been routinely ignored (or unknown) by the general public and no-one is really going to sue you for it because (I believe) it would be a civil case where all they could gain are "damages" which would be so minimal as to not be worth the effort (As it's just single use in the home the inflationary costing that peer to peer copying allows them to claim isn't there).

While this is being suggested as a "win" for the people I'd expect there is strong motivation from business to sort this out too. It doesn't suit them for copyright law to be seen as flexible and routinely ignored now that distribution is so easy for people to do.

Re:Any Enforcement?

Were they enforced often

True story...

At the last federal election I rock up to the polling place, a school not too far from my house. I just walked up, got the iPod going so I don't have to listen to the local "party members" trying to hand me how to vote forms. As I walk in this guy, talking to someone on his left, bumps into me. I turn around, he turns around. It's fucking John Howard (prime minister of Oz if you don't know) - his office is just up the road from the school and he'd wandered down for a meet-and-greet. I just kept going.

He did nothing! There I was, fragantly defying the law of the land and our fearless leader, otherwise known as "the rodent", did nothing. He had his security guys there. He could of tackled me himself. Grabbed me and made a citizen's arrest or something. But he did nothing. Weak on law he is. Weak!

Mass civil disobedience wins?

I'm an Australian and I know of four police officers who are absolutely aware of my mp3(/ogg) collection. My collection is ripped from cd's that I legitimately own using sound-juicer and put onto my ipod using gtkpod. The police officers that have knowledge of this have part-taken in usage of my ipod to play these 'illegal' tracks and in three cases the officers themselves have children (or personally) who have mp3's both legal and illegal.

So I ask; how can the police enforce a law/requirement that they themselves do not respect? Further more I welcome this ruling from our great overlords (who I voted against) as it will stop most of the population being made criminals for using some thing (fairly) that they paid for. Kudos.

PS. Please don't arrest me and use this post* in court as an admittance of breaking the law!

*In the event that this post is used in the above fashion it is a complete fabrication! *Hides in his Bunker!

Re:Artists lose???

Technically they are currently losing money, but your point is valid.

The truth is, this is RIAA math (not the RIAA, but same kind). Remember that 4 blank CDs may cost $2 or whatever, but their value is the $150 that a 4 disc box set might cost (because that is what you could pirate with it). Logic, as usual for these kind of groups, does not apply.

Re:Artists lose???

"Artist" in this context means "media corporations", and "lose" means "fail to gain".