Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government The Almighty Buck News

Australia to Get Software Patents and Anti-Circumvention Laws 392

Marlor writes "Australia's main opposition party have just confirmed that they will be supporting the Free Trade Agreement with the USA. This means that Australia will be adopting DMCA-style laws and Software Patents in the name of 'harmonizing IP laws with the USA', despite consistent lobbying against them. Matters are made worse by the fact that, unlike Americans, Australians are not protected by 'fair use' provisions." Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australia to Get Software Patents and Anti-Circumvention Laws

Comments Filter:
  • If the conservatives are voted out, the provisions can be watered down or ignored in new 'enabling' legislation, much as the US will ignore their side of the bargain.
    • by LordPixie ( 780943 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:08AM (#9869310) Journal
      What makes you think the liberals have sold out any less than the conservatives ? It's not like Clinton signed the DMCA into law, or anything.

      The vague hope lies in us somehow electing a third party or non-politician politician. We've got the same chance as a paper dog chasing an asbestos cat through hell.


      --LordPixie
      • by Anonymous Coward
        Civil disobedience is the only out.
        • by Anonymous Coward
          Can anyone explain to me why government protection of industries can be called "free trade"?
          • Can anyone explain to me why government protection of industries can be called "free trade"?

            Because calling it "Global restricted trade" would be stupid.

            I'm not just being crass. It's common sense to look on the bright side when it comes to nomenclature. That's why we use "Pro Choice" and "Pro life". They're both equally irrelevant to the topic at hand, but they sound good. Likewise with the Patriot act, and just about anything else ever named on the face of the planet.


            --LordPixie
      • by tepples ( 727027 ) <.tepples. .at. .gmail.com.> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:27AM (#9869445) Homepage Journal

        It's not like Clinton signed the DMCA into law, or anything.

        Even if then-President Clinton didn't want the DMCA and the Bono Act to become law, he could not have stopped them, as both the House and the Senate passed the Bono Act and the DMCA by voice vote. Under the Constitution for the USA, a presidential veto has little if any hope of beating a voice vote, as it takes 81 percent in favor to pass a law by voice vote (that is, one-fifth to force a roll call) but only 67 percent to override a presidential veto.

        The vague hope lies in us somehow electing a third party or non-politician politician.

        What you want in this case is a member of a small-government party such as the Libertarian Party in the USA or a foreign counterpart. You might want to read the Cato Institute's position on copyrights and patents [cato.org].

        We've got the same chance as a paper dog chasing an asbestos cat through hell.

        All political parties take time to get a foothold in government. To get more libertarians into an elected federal office, start at the level of the legislature.

        • Even if then-President Clinton didn't want the DMCA and the Bono Act to become law, he could not have stopped them, as both the House and the Senate passed the Bono Act and the DMCA by voice vote. Under the Constitution for the USA, a presidential veto has little if any hope of beating a voice vote, as it takes 81 percent in favor to pass a law by voice vote (that is, one-fifth to force a roll call) but only 67 percent to override a presidential veto.

          I'll readily admit that Clinton probably wouldn't ha
    • ...that ultimately, no legislation passed by the government can surpass the influence that consumers have with respect to how they choose to spend their money.

      Media is another form of crack. Once people learn to shed their dependence and actually restrain themselves from acquiring everything that Media, Inc. pumps out, the resulting (hopefully significant) drop in revenue will send a clear message that either the rules of the game will change, or Media, Inc. will just have to settle for what it can scrape
    • by Bull999999 ( 652264 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @12:46PM (#9870015) Journal
      Like as if an average citizen knows what DMCA, DRM, software patent, FOSS, etc. are. Don't to notice that the magic words now are terrorism, social security, medicare, economy, and job market? If you are a politician, whould you concentrate your efforts to a small group of geeks with crappy voting records?

      I hate to break this news to you but the population in large doesn't really give a damn about what the geeks think and they don't act on any of the issues until it starts to hurt their bottom line.
      • Like as if an average citizen knows what DMCA, DRM, software patent, FOSS, etc. are.

        Right. But they do know that they can share their printed books but not their e-books. They, however, blame the publishers and not the governments....

        Don't to notice that the magic words now are terrorism, social security, medicare, economy, and job market?

        These are strongly connected to the issues of DRM and copyright protections.

        If you are a politician, whould you concentrate your efforts to a small group of ge
  • It's not odd! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zeroth_darkos ( 311840 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:23AM (#9869020)
    Harmonization is always in the direction of the power. It doesn't have a thing to do with what's good for innovation anymore.
    • Has it ever?
    • Re:It's not odd! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by vandan ( 151516 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @03:50PM (#9871839) Homepage
      Exactly.

      That's one of the many reasons why I've become an active supporter of the Socialist Alliance [socialist-alliance.org] leading up to the federal election.

      Those who think Labor are providing 'opposition' to the Liberals and their neo-conservative buddies in the Whitehouse should have a good hard think about Labor's position on the Free Trade Agreement ( among other things ).

      Vote out Howard, but don't give Latham & Labor a landslide - give your first vote to left-wing parties such as Socialist Alliance and the Greens, and give your preferences to Labor - send Labor a message that we aren't 100% with them.
      • Re:It's not odd! (Score:5, Informative)

        by imroy ( 755 ) <imroykun@gmail.com> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @05:00PM (#9872591) Homepage Journal
        Vote out Howard, but don't give Latham & Labor a landslide - give your first vote to left-wing parties such as Socialist Alliance and the Greens, and give your preferences to Labor - send Labor a message that we aren't 100% with them.

        Thanks to the preferential voting system this is pretty much how I vote. I give my first preferences to the Greens [greens.org.au] and Democrats [democrats.org.au] before Labour and the coalition (and then the small nutbag parties). I can do this confident that I'm not "throwing away" my vote. I can vote for the little parties and my lesser-of-two-evils large party at the same time.

  • by Rude Turnip ( 49495 ) <valuationNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:25AM (#9869041)
    For plaguing us with not one, or two, but *three* Crocodile Dundee movies!
  • How 'bout that? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChozCunningham ( 698051 ) <slashdot.org @ c h o z cunningham.com> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:26AM (#9869053) Homepage
    Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country.

    Because restrictive IP laws create concentration of wealth, which is power. Power leads to the ability to coerce others. And nobody grows powerful by using their existing wealth to create an envirinment that is free-er.

    • Re:How 'bout that? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MojoRilla ( 591502 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:02AM (#9869256)
      And nobody grows powerful by using their existing wealth to create an envirinment that is free-er.

      There are many, many examples, from politics to the free software movement, that dispute this.

      Richard Stallman has used his wealth (in terms of programming time, energy) to create software that is free-er, and is much more powerful than he would have been had he not done it.

      Nelson Mandella campaigned and spend years in jail to free South Africa from Apartheid [wikipedia.org] and he grew powerful.

      Likewise, Linus would probably have been an anonymous programmer in Finland if he had decided to keep his operating system proprietary.

      Power comes from many things in society. Not all of them have to do with money. Sometimes giving things away or doing the right thing makes you powerful.
      • Re:How 'bout that? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by diamondsw ( 685967 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:31AM (#9869458)
        Unfortunately, the reason we know of these cases is that they are the exceptions that prove the rule.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • And his reward... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:37AM (#9869505) Homepage
        "Richard Stallman has used his wealth (in terms of programming time, energy) to create software that is free-er, and is much more powerful than he would have been had he not done it. "

        Sure, and for his trouble, he's called names from every end of the political spectrum.
      • Re:How 'bout that? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ratamacue ( 593855 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @01:40PM (#9870547)
        I think we need to define "power". For me, power can mean only one thing: the "right" to initiate force as a means to an end. It does not mean wealth, influence over others, popularity, knowledge, or ownership of business or material items. It is entirely possible to have all of those things and not posess an ounce of power.

        I am only concerned with power as it relates to interaction between people, because as an individual with unique wants and needs, it is in my best interest to respect all other individuals EXCEPT those who operate on the principle of force (as opposed to the principle of voluntary association).

        I would argue that Mandella had influence, but not power. I would argue that Mandella had great influence precisely because of his lack of power. Mandella fought against, not for, power.

        What definition of power are you using?
    • "And nobody grows powerful by using their existing wealth to create an envirinment that is free-er."

      The American Founding Fathers?

  • IP... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SlashDread ( 38969 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:26AM (#9869054)
    "no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country"

    Keep talking about "IP".. and that will NEVER change.

    The crux is this: we all bought in this phantom "Information Economy" in the 90's, completely bypassing the fact that the real money is made with SERVICES, not INFORMATION.

    This whole "IT revolution" meme needs to be shot. And before that happens, stuff is likely to get far worse first.

    "/Dread"
    • by Anonymous Coward
      This whole "IT revolution" meme needs to be shot. And before that happens, stuff is likely to get far worse first.


      It would please me to no end if such a thing could come to pass. Unfortunately, history has shown that the only way to put a stop to trends that benefit the rich at the expense of the poor is to shoot the rich. And even then, the effect is only temporary.

  • No DVDs for you! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by underpar ( 792569 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:27AM (#9869064) Homepage
    I'm sure you see the importance of stopping people that run Linux from playing DVDs. Go FTA!
  • Not odd (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shackma2 ( 685062 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:29AM (#9869081)
    Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country.

    It's not odd at all. The Australian government wants more trade from the US, whitch will only occur if the Australian government increases IP regulation. If the Australian people want less IP regulation (I.e. fair use clauses), its up to them to lobby their government. Things don't usually happen in government because its the right thing to do, things happen because of interests. In this case, businesses (both US and Australian) have a compelling interest towards more trade, so until there is a compelling interest towards fair use the Australian government will probbley not get around to it.

    • Why not free trade (Score:2, Insightful)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      businesses (both US and Australian) have a compelling interest towards more trade

      Except when the agreements that would increase trade come with riders that decrease the trade in those businesses' products. This is true especially of the electronics sector, where the Bono Act + DMCA + patents on math in this so-called "free" trade agreement would tend to either make products either less desirable or ban them outright.

    • Re:Not odd (Score:3, Interesting)

      by wayward ( 770747 )
      Just as a side note, the US and Australia have been allies for years. Australia hosts US military and surveillance operations. This was mentioned in The Falcon and the Snowman, where the US intelligence was using a station in Alice Springs (Australia) to gather signals from Rhyolite intelligence satellites. According to the book, the US had promised to share everything with the Australians but apparently didn't do this. However, Australia seems to be quite tolerant, and is still cooperating with US mili
    • Re:Not odd (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Herby Werby ( 645641 )
      Ahh, I see the crux of the problem: if they were to want more trade with China rather than the US then this wouldn't have arisen. The bulk of the World's IP sits in the US and the 'owners' want to protect it. Consequently, any country that wants trade with the US must first acknowledge that the IP is indeed property that the 'owners' are entitled to exploit it.
    • Re:Not odd (Score:3, Insightful)

      Lobbying government only has any effect if the government has an incentive to listen. Most voters are not concerned about copyright and patent law, and most voters are not aware of the problems with laws such as the DMCA.

      A politician standing his ground and upsetting a trade agreement because of DMCA provisions will not win votes, he will loose them. His opposition will say he's a "trouble maker", and he's "upsetting important trade negotiations". They won't say "look at this guy, he's standing up for t
    • Re:Not odd (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ThisIsFred ( 705426 )
      Exactly. And this is entirely stupid, because it increases their cost of doing business, which means they'll be able to offer less in trade. Which means our exporters will be taking a pay cut. Which, of course, means that people will lose their job. But you won't hear about those jobs, because they don't all "vanish" at once, so there's no political advantage to pointing it out.

      I'm simplifying here, there are quite a few more good and bad effects of this.
  • Welll.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:29AM (#9869082)
    Matters are made worse by the fact that, unlike Americans, Australians are not protected by 'fair use' provisions.

    What? Americans are protected by fair use provisions? I mean, I know we have them, but I didn't realize they still did anything.

    • Re:Welll.... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Rotten168 ( 104565 )
      Sure they do. People quote copyrighted works and article excerpts all the time in Slashdot, and that is considered fair use for example.
  • Economies (Score:5, Interesting)

    by headkase ( 533448 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:29AM (#9869091)
    I'd like to see a block of maybe africa and the middle east just say screw it and form their own economic associations independent of the United States. They wouldn't have great GDP's but at least they'd be creating their own economies suited to their specific needs and not letting the vacuum machine that is the US suck up all their money.
    Developing countries are not a market for our TV production and their home textile industries can't get off the ground because the West floods developing markets with cheap bolts of cloth or discarded clothing. Our economic interests do not match, the developing world needs to bootstrap itself to the next economic level while the West economies tend to take aggressive advantage of any market as our goal is the creation of our wealth not for the benefit of the markets that such behaviour tends to suck dry.
    Or not.
    • Re:Economies (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Threni ( 635302 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:06AM (#9869280)
      > I'd like to see a block of maybe africa and the middle east just say screw it
      > and form their own economic associations independent of the United States. They
      > wouldn't have great GDP's but at least they'd be creating their own economies
      > suited to their specific needs and not letting the vacuum machine that is the
      > US suck up all their money.

      You could call it Cuba, for instance.

    • South America (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Damek ( 515688 )
      Look to South America as well. It was chiefly Brazil, along with other South American, Asian, and probably African countries that took a stand at the world trade summit in Cancun last September. The group may not last, but it's the start of what you're talking about.
    • Re:Economies (Score:4, Interesting)

      by payndz ( 589033 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @03:03PM (#9871356)
      I'd like to see a block of maybe africa and the middle east just say screw it and form their own economic associations independent of the United States.

      Any such bloc would be fucked over - probably with bombs - in very short order. The current US National Security Strategy [whitehouse.gov] is so loosely worded that (viewed with a Rumsfeldian eye) it gives the US more or less carte blanche to intervene militarily as and when it chooses, anywhere in the world, if it feels its interests - ie, the interests of those in power - are threatened. On the surface it's very noble - it's all couched in the language of 'bring democracy and freedom to the developing world'. But read between the lines, and it's more a case of 'open up the developing world's markets to US interests'. The biotechnology clause is blatantly pro-Monsanto and co, for a start. 'They want aid? Then make the bastards buy our patented GM seeds!'

      The ruling politicians of the other English-speaking developed nations - Australia, the UK - are so desperate to be a part of Bush's banquet that they'll happily sign away the rights of their citizens for the chance to lick the few drops of spilt gravy from America's trouser bottoms. It's an absolute fucking disgrace, but there doesn't seem to be any credible opposition because all the other politicians just want their own chance to get under the table.

  • by FedeTXF ( 456407 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:34AM (#9869121)
    It has happened many times before in many countries and with many issues. US allways pushes other countries to have laws mimic its own.
    During the Argentina's default/devaluation crisis, US (through the IMF) made Argentina's congress pass a bankrupcy law in the term of the chapter-11 kind of thing the US has (IANAL). Anne Krueger (head of the IMF then) told everybody Argentina had to "adapt its legislation to the international standards" (i.e. US' standard).
    They were foreseeing massive bankrupcies, but none (significant) happened so no US-based companies took control of any troubled local company.
    Before that bankrupt companied were handled by a judge in a specific way, not handed to the lenders.
  • by the_raptor ( 652941 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:35AM (#9869128)
    I am an Australian and am completely sick of our Governments (both parties) acting like cheap hookers around US corporations. Screw you guys I am moving to Finland.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:49AM (#9869188)
      Of course the other option is actually put in some effort to demonstrate your opposition to the FTA. The Greens party [greens.org.au] in Australia have consistently been against the FTA. The Aust. Labour party courts them for directing voting preferences to the ALP. How about supporting them, or writing to your local newspaper, calling your local politician and writing to Latham, leader of the ALP?

      Remember, no vote has been cast yet and there are two significant conditions placed on the adoption of the FTA by the ALP before they vote for it, so it's not too late to visit the anti-FTA sites nofta.org [nofta.org] and tradewatchoz.or [tradewatchoz.org].
    • I'm also Australian, and I'm coming home this year after three years in latin america.

      Dude, Where's my country?

      Finland is nice. Bloody cold and dark, but there are a lot of warm Finnish girls named "Ana" who will help you with that.
    • I'm in Finland at the moment, for the Assembly demoparty, and I can honestly say things seem a lot more logical here than in the UK and the US. Things aren't done for companies, but things aren't done for the people, they seem to have taken the "thinking" approach and thought out what is the most sensible law. I actually prefer Helsinki to any other city on the planet I have visited - the streets are clean, there are no hobo's (they all die every winter) and the people are generally really nice. Maybe it's
    • Don't bother. We already have software patents and our goverment is also planning sticter copyright laws.
  • Good News! (Score:5, Informative)

    by femto ( 459605 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:36AM (#9869132) Homepage
    The opposition has attached two non-negotiable conditions [smh.com.au] to their support of the "Free" Trade Agreement legislation. The government has said will not agree [abc.net.au] to one of these conditions. This might delay the passage of the legislation until after the next election, by which time the balance of power could have changed and the legislation can be considered on its merits instead of political manoeuvring. If the deadlock is never resolved the legislation might die a natural death.
    • Re:Good News! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Marlor ( 643698 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:56AM (#9869668)
      The opposition has attached two non-negotiable conditions to their support of the "Free" Trade Agreement legislation.

      If the deadlock is never resolved the legislation might die a natural death.

      This has only come up since I submitted the story this afernoon, but this is all the more reason to write letters to newspapers and politicians to let them know how you feel about the FTA. If we stay quiet, the issues with the FTA will continue to be ignored. If we make our opinion known (loudly), then maybe it will become an issue in future negotiations.

      So, please people, don't sit back and hope that the FTA is stalled by parliament. Take action, make it known that Software Patents and anti-circumvention laws are a Bad Thing, and hopefully politicians and the media will stop ignoring this issue.
  • Does this mean... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by yuud ( 690436 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:41AM (#9869152) Journal
    That US patents will apply to Australian software developers? Australia's economy is tiny compared to the US, and I'm not keen on the effect this has on Australia IT startups trying to avoid the patent highwayman on all the backroads... :(
  • Rupert Murdoch (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I have yet to see anyone mention the real force behind the devolution of the copyright bargain throughout the world. People here on Slashdot go on endlessly about the evil of Windows and Bill Gates, but utterly fail to acknowledge the real source stifling innovation: Rupert Murdoch.
    • Re:Rupert Murdoch (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Catamaran ( 106796 )
      This is a good point. The powers pushing DMCA, etc. are multinational companies like Sony. They control the US government, and now it looks like they control Australia's government too. So, we can (and should) write to our representatives, but we should also think about more direct forms of action, e.g. boycotting those companies.
  • Legislation slows progress. In time, nations that do not have these silly laws will surpass those that do in terms of innovation. The question is, will the DMCA countries repeal these laws before that happens or after.
    • "In time, nations that do not have these silly laws will surpass those that do in terms of innovation."

      Unless those nations get coerced/cajoled/tricked/bribed into adjusting and adopting the same or similar laws.

      "Legislation slows progress."

      Progress is not necessarily in the interest of the entrenched powers. Progress leads to change and change might not be a good thing if you're among the priviliged.

      And guess who's doing the legislation...
  • A black day, indeed. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FoboldFKY ( 785255 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:55AM (#9869217)

    Today, the final shread of faith that I had left in my government has finally disappeared. I am now sorry to be Australian.

    I "know" why they're doing this. The same reason they got into politics in the first place. Power. Money. Fame. Although perhaps the wholesale "if you don't cave in, you can forget about trade and any kind of military protection in the future" line from the US government helped seal the deal.

    What I do not understand is how these people sleep at night, knowing they have sold out every last Australian they supposedly represent. Do they lie in bed next to their loved ones and think "today I signed away my people's freedoms to foreign companies; what a great leader I am"? Or are they just so profoundly stupid that they can't see the plague they are about to unleash on us?

    To the Liberals and Labor: you make me ashamed to even be the same nationality as you. If I ever hear you utter the word "freedom" again, I will be sick.

    I'm going to cry in the corner now. You can rest easy knowing that you've betrayed us all.

    • by MeNeXT ( 200840 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:15AM (#9869377)
      They are thinking..."Stupid people elected me and they do not even care enough to get upset while I sell their liberties away"....


      Or something like that.

    • > What I do not understand is how these people sleep at night. Easily. The explanation is that they do not give a fuck about anybody else. Simple, really. They were born to rule. The earth and everything on it, including their own citizens, is there to be exploited for profit. The proof? The condemnation of the Phillipine government when they elected to pull troops out of Iraq to save one of their citizens from having his head chopped of on tele. Compassion? What compassion? Until somebody holds a g
    • I fully sympathise.
      The problem of the modern day and age is that politicians are considered "leaders" of the people. Where and when did this happen? Are not politicians chosen by the people to represent them and their interests?

      When did it come to be that the people became used to the idea that politicians were somehow more privileged, more important, wiser or more worthy than themselves?

      I feel the "system" has moulded after its own design into beings who can't think outside this "system". We, the peop
    • by drtomaso ( 694800 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @12:20PM (#9869847)

      First, some disclaimers: IANAL, IANAA, IANAAL (I am not a lawyer, an Australian, or even an Australian Lawyer)

      As I am not an Australian, I cannot speak for your people, your government or your political parties. However, in any republican government, and Australia and the US would seem to qualify, governing will always boil down to special interest politics. Governing is a complex task, and one of the benefits of having small, vocal minorities is that they do the enormous amount of highly specialized research on the issues for the representatives. In a way, its one of the few things that keeps the process of governing from becoming overloaded.

      What you have to realize is that on the issues like DMCA-style legislation, the world breaks down into three categories- a special interest that really wants strong 'IP' laws (media conglomerates, monopolistic software titans, etc) , a special interest that really doesnt want them (slashdot geeks, libertarians, eff members) and the largest group out there: the completely apathetic/ignorant. Now, given that the vast majority of the represented dont care one way or the other which way their representatives go on this issue, which would you chose? The small special interest that posts stories on a web page all day or the small special interest offering you, not just campaign contributions, but a trade agreement that could bring both $ and jobs to your community.

      That doesnt make it right, but until "we the people" wake up and actually start to care in the US, the place to fight this is the courts. I'd assume that to be a good place in Australia, Canada and the UK as well.

  • by Slinky Saves the Wor ( 759676 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @10:57AM (#9869229) Homepage

    Apparently the government of Australia has nothing better to do than to attempt the killing of the IT industry of Australia.

    The idea behind the so-called "Free Trade" treaty will work when ALL countries on this Earth adhere to it, and enforce it. But while there are countries which do not have such strict laws, the countries implementing such laws will suffer a severe competitive disadvantage.

    The result will be that the law will be evaded by taking work elsewhere. This means lost revenues and hurts the Australian IT industry.

    Have you noticed how the Internet and things dealing with it are slowly sinking into a swamp full of legalization? The reason is to attach to the Internet the same power structures as the "old" business has, the same rulers, the same power players, the same mind-numbing consumer-grade nothingness.

  • The FTAA - similar deal, but relating to the Americas, scheduled to be signed on early 2005, has a prevision for DMCA like anti-circunvention law requirements by all parties.

    It, however, states that "Computer Programs" are not subject to patenteability.

    It is on chapter XX of the third draft for the FTAA [ftaa-alca.org]. Subsection B.2.c (Copyright and related rights), articles 21, 22, 23 contain the DMCAish stuff. Patents are described further bellow.
  • "Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country."

    Not odd at all: Just follow the money. For those people / companies with money who want to make more money the quickest way to reach that goal is to create a need and then charge to fill it. By harmonizing IP laws to help create barriers to creating copies of Intellectual Property, they create a shortage of material that they can charge to fill. In the c

  • Cross pollination (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:02AM (#9869257) Homepage Journal
    Since the Aussie's dont have 'fair use' rights, the logic of the WTO would conclude that the USA has to drop their citizens 'fair use' rights to conform with the lowest common denominator between the countries.

    This is the real danger of the WTO, as it forces you to ingore your laws, in favor of some other countries concept of right and wrong..
  • by xquark ( 649804 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:05AM (#9869269) Homepage
    The FTA has not passed the Australian senate, and
    most likely will not be ratified until after this
    year's Australian federal elections.

    The hold-up is being caused by the major opposition
    party in Australia not agreeing to terms set forward
    by Americans regarding the fedral acquisition and
    subsidies of pharmaceuticals.

    Hopefully this sticking point will render the FTA
    void and hence stop any further destruction of the
    Australian patent and intellectual property laws

    Arash Partow

    ________________________________________________ __
    Be one who knows what they don't know,
    Instead of being one who knows not what they don't know,
    Thinking they know everything about all things.
    http://www.partow.net

  • by grunt107 ( 739510 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:05AM (#9869275)
    The more draconian countries get with 'IP' rules, the less said countries actually innovate. This is similar to the industries monopolized by IP giants.

    Take for example the hated SCO. They are so focused on IP litigation that their product line is dying.

    Microsoft has the same problem, especially with security provisions. So many have probed the limits of this common OS and since it has not significantly changed in over 6 years, exploits are easy.

    What will happen, in the end, is that these countries will become more dependent on other, more flexible ('hungry?') countries for future innovations. And their influence in the world will lessen.
  • by tezza ( 539307 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:07AM (#9869298)
    If you fill out an Australian GST registration for a new company the first box is:

    1. Are you a Primary Producer? [read Farmers and Miners]

    The Primary Producers have so much sway even in this day and age. They get more access to sell Tin/ Chrome/ Wool/ Lamb and the technology and intellectual capital gets shoved under the rug.

    This is what has occurred here.

    Australia is entirely dependent on US for defence as well. The Australian Army has enough ammunition for 3-5 days of full combat [defence.gov.au]. There is almost always a few days lead time before invasions, and these two combined is designed for enough time for the US to step in and back us up. This is why Australia is so closely aligned with the US.

    Australia is content having the Brain Drain [abc.net.au]. To the politicians on both sides, the net benefit outweighs the loss of innovation.

  • So does this mean I cant keep downloading Yahoo Seriously movies?
  • Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country.

    Maybe it has something to do with making money as opposed to not making money. Remember, a company that has IP can generate jobs and make money for the government in the form of taxes. Removing IP and you just dropped the bottom out of that market, which may be profitable for developing countries.
    • by EzInKy ( 115248 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:35AM (#9869487)
      Maybe it has something to do with making money as opposed to not making money. Remember, a company that has IP can generate jobs and make money for the government in the form of taxes. Removing IP and you just dropped the bottom out of that market, which may be profitable for developing countries.

      IP is only an issue if you make it an issue, which Australia seems want to do. But still there is hope for Europe and Asia who may yet still realize how much of a technological lead can be realized if they stick together and ensure their developers can create without having to fear being sued for something as silly as allowing a user to click once.
  • Balance. Bah! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Xebikr ( 591462 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:13AM (#9869357)
    I used to be in favor of balance, and moderation, and rights of creators etc. Now, I have no such feelings. I watch as the copyright extremists win battle after battle by taking a stance that strengthening IP laws is not only necessary but a moral imperative. They use words like pirate and theft, while we say balance and culture and freedom of expression. They have a clear agenda and deep pockets while our oposition is under funded and constantly debating on what balance means.

    Furthermore there seems to be no way we are ever going to get our legislators to understand the harm that increasing the power of is having. Legislators are free to enact these laws because the average person has no chance of understanding copyright.

    The only way we are going to get any change is by adopting a similarly extreme position. By completly ignoring copyright law or deliberately acting against it. Bankrupt the content owners' legal fund and clog the courts with infringement cases. Act against the goverments position in favor of the will of the people. In short, we need revolution. That is the only way we will ever see positive change.
  • by Marlor ( 643698 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:18AM (#9869393)
    I think that all Aussies with an interest in being able to use their computers unencumbered should really make their frustration over this deal known now. While it may be too late to stop the FTA, we still might be able to make a difference. Hopefully if we make enough noise the media and politicians will stop ignoring the IP aspects of the FTA.

    So, start sending letters to newspapers. The FTA is a hot topic in the news right now, so there's a good chance it will be accepted [news.com.au] (see letter second from the bottom).

    You can send letters to the editor at the following addresses:
    The Australian [news.com.au]
    Sydney Morning Herald [mailto]
    The Age [mailto]

    If US Slashdotters are keen, they could even send a "letter to the editor" detailing the problems with the DMCA and software patents that Australia will now face.

    You can also let your feeling be known to the shadow minister for the Arts, Sport and Information Technology (Senator Kate Lundy). Her contact details are here [katelundy.com.au]. Be sure to mention that this issue will affect your vote.

    You can also find out what electorate [aec.gov.au] you are in, if you don't already know, and send your local federal MP a message about how disappointed you are over the FTA's impact on the IT industry.

    While the timing of the posting of this story on Slashdot wasn't ideal (most Aussie Slashdotters won't be awake for another 5 or 6 hours), hopefully a reasonable number will read this in the morning and take action.
  • by NZheretic ( 23872 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:25AM (#9869431) Homepage Journal
    In protest all Australia Open Source and Small software vendor developers should on mass purchase a airline ticket to New Zealand on a date close to the signing of the treaty. Then forward a photocopy of the ticket to their state and federal representatives explaining that they are looking to emigrate because of the adoption of such business hostile draconian legislation.
    • by imroy ( 755 ) <imroykun@gmail.com> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @04:46PM (#9872459) Homepage Journal

      I must say that New Zealand is looking better all the time. We've always made jokes about sheep in NZ and their accents. But with our "American arse-kisser" of a PM, the whole fear-mongering "war on terrorism", and now this FTA - NZ isn't looking so bad! It's not far and I have relatives other there. If the DMCA-like and other IP parts of this FTA turns out as bad as we're fearing, I think we will see a large trans-Tasman migration. And not just of IT workers but even whole companies could move their base over.

  • by Maul ( 83993 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:42AM (#9869551) Journal
    It is time for other countries to stand up and say "no" to bringing their laws into "conformance" with those of the United States.

    Software patents (especially for common sense processes), DMCA-like laws, etc. are nothing more than measures for "corporate welfare," destroying the property rights and other rights of consumers and small companies in favor of protecting the business models of megacorps and giant trade organizations. This is the effect these things have had here in the USA.

    If your lawmakers plan on playing along with these stupid laws, you should vote them out BEFORE they even have a chance to pass them in your country.
    • The more bilateral treaties the US can sign which contain DMCA, Software Patent and Big Pharma-friendly provisions, the less chance it will have of repealing such laws. The U.S. executive will be able to point to these bilateral treaties and shrug - we couldn't change them even if we wanted to. THAT is why GW Bush signed the treaty just now ( http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200408/s1168 234.htm [abc.net.au]) with unseemly haste. Not because Australia matters economically to the U.S., but because it helps to entr
  • by eamacnaghten ( 695001 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:49AM (#9869604) Homepage Journal
    Ah well - another government screwing there own software industry I suppose having been convinced that Software Patents are the only way to get significant foreign IT investments, the convincer no doubt being Microsoft and the like... Lawyers agreeing to this as it means lining their pockets at the expense of everyone else - the cost? A generation not being able to take advantage of technical inovations without paying a tax to companies and entities that had nothing to do with it's development....

    The way it is looking too unless something major can happen the UK and Europe are heading the same way....

  • by DeanFox ( 729620 ) * <spam.myname@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @12:01PM (#9869709)

    As far as I can tell, as an American, I cannot go through my day without breaking the law. My quest is no longer to be a law-biding citizen, that's impossible, but rather not to get caught.

    Even the bleach for my laundry says it's a felony to use the product inconsistent with its labeling. So, if rather than measuring the one-cup recommended amount I pour it in guessing, they could put me in jail.

    Yes, but they'd never do that I hear someone saying for such a minor infraction. Uh-huh. Here in Atlanta a man was put in jail because a Viagra pill fell from his wallet when he retrieved his license for a police officer. He had a legal prescription; the problem was not that he had the pill. He was jailed because the pill was not being stored it's original container. Some jail time, sexual abuse checking cavities during intake, a few thousand dollars in fines, attorney and court costs and he's again a free man.

    I cannot speak words strong enough to convey my conviction of the need for a totally un-traceable, encrypted form of P2P. This is not the United States I learned about in school. Maybe it never existed. But I know today is doesn't.

    Other countries have faced or are facing this same thing. I don't believe greed and the desire for the power to control the masses is inherently American. I believe it will get to the point where certain laws are just going to have to ignored. This is where I think the P2P solution comes into place. Abet, it will only be a temporary solution. They will eventually outlaw and trace encrypted packets.

    -[d]-
  • Odd that 'harmonizing' is always in one direction - for some reason, no one ever wants to decrease IP regulation to harmonize with some other country.

    Sometimes harmonizing is the most inappropriate course of action.

    Case in point: michael's continuous efforts to harmonize his role as a Slashdot editor (who makes a story available for comment) and a role as a Slashdot poster (who provides commentary independent of the story itself).

    Knock it off, guy. If you have something to add to a story you should do
  • by Anita Coney ( 648748 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @12:29PM (#9869884) Homepage
    even though you bought something, it's not really yours. So don't even THINK about opening it up and seeing how it works.

  • Was the Free trade agreement payback for supporting the war against Iraq?

    I hope the Aussies have learned something from other FTA's with the US and have a binding dispute resolution mechanism that WORKS.

  • Lots of countries (ie : France) are said to be anti-American nowadays.

    Maybe France is only anti-American legistlation and doesn't want to become yet another star on your flag. People don't hate Americans they just hate the lawyers in the US that cause problems everywhere else with their unfair laws.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @03:05PM (#9871378)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Fair Use (Score:3, Informative)

    by catwh0re ( 540371 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:10PM (#9873330)
    In Australia we don't have fair use, making it technically illegal to copy music from a cd onto our computers and onto a 3rd party device... however what we don't have is the ARIA suing music listeners, or trying to get products taken off shelves.

    We also have compulsory voting, which does a pretty good job of putting fear in our politicians.

    Coincidently there is an article on smh.com.au detailing how the only legal music we can put on iPod at the moment is the music a user has created. No iTunes music store, and Rip. Burn. Mix. isn't legal here. (With no enforcers.)

  • by syousef ( 465911 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:45PM (#9873731) Journal
    Its looks to me like your Mr Bush has been amazing allies, friends and family by shoving his hand up our politician's butts and making them say whatever he wants again...and all without his lips moving too! Oh Mr Bush, you're so talented, and all with such wooden spineless dummies!

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...