Slashdot Mirror
Australia To Adopt U.S.-Style Copyright Laws
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 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 to the Australian Broadcasting Council news story on the same item.
Humorous signatures are over-rated.
Here in NZ, everyone is upset because we missed out on a fair trade agreement with the States, no one really expects one, but every once in a while someone pops up and says there's one around the corner. I tell you what though, with those kind of agreements required, I feel better off not having one. Let alone all the sucking up Aussie has had to do to get it.
This could lead to more Anton Pilar order raids... perhaps larger companies raiding smaller companies and seizing equipment to drive them out of business.
Hunt your preferred prey at Aliens vs Predator MUD. Join the war at avpmud.com port 4000
Does anyone with knowledge of Austrailian law know if the Austrailian treaty will violate some of their freedoms in the way the American DMCA has violated some of the United States citizen's freedoms contained within the constitution? This wouldn't sound so outrageous if the freedoms contained within the treaty didn't really tread upon Austrailian constitution/law, but if not...
My question is: How will this affect Project Gutenberg Australia?
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)?
I was going to put a sig here, but I had already submitted the message.
I suppose this is the misery-loves-company school of treaty negotiation.
Not really, it's more of a John Howard Loves George Bush kind of negotiation. Johnny wants to be in the club with Dubya and Tony. So he sent troops, maintains the US had intelligence on WMD, defends Bush and Blair in the press, talks tough on gay marriage ('survival of the species' he says... apparently if gays marry then hetero couples will somehow lose the ability to procreate), etc. Anything the US wants, Howard wants to give them.
He has a bad case of "little man syndrome" and wants to play with the "big boys" really bad.
The opposing party brought in their biggest brashest loud-mouthed battler to face him in the upcoming elections. Of course, once they made him their candidate they said "don't be so loud or brash any more" so he's sort of impotent. It does not bode will for the people here in the land of beer and pokies.
- I am made of meat.
Australia already has bugger all fair use rights (we can't even tape a show from TV for later viewing legally).
Now it looks like we're set to inherit all the bad stuff from US IP laws.
We'll be leading the world in fucked up IP legeslation. Things are really looking up for Australia's place in the world!
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 :)
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. 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.
Australia is having some problems in adapting to globalization, specifically with technology development.
Granted, Australia is a faily isolated island, but many industrialized countries are using Internet and telephone as though they are commodities. Last time I looked at pricing for such services in Australia the costs were astronomous.
With the possible adoption of this DMCA type legislation - which has slowed some technology research in the US - I don't see this helping Australia to modernize its economy. Unless of course, the free trade is really beneficial. While Canada and Mexico might have benefitted from NAFTA, it was only because the US knew it was to its advantage to use it. Now, Australia will be used too.
No, no, that's the UK.
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.
I'd always thought being outside of the US made file sharing that little bit safer - an international legal boundary to cross before being harassed.
However, one particular line in the IP agreement shows that is no longer the case:
"An expeditious process that allows for copyright owners to engage with Internet Service Providers and subscribers to deal with allegedly infringing copyright material on the Internet."
Australian file sharers, beware.
Read reviews of shopping cart software
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is likely to take a dim view on all of this.
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.
Fair rights laws are covered by Common Law in Australia, not the constitution.
Interestingly, a lot of things that our laws say you cannot do (such as things covered by the US Betamax case) have never been tested in Australian courts. Is taping a TV illegal? According to the legislation, yes it is. Would the legislation hold up against Common Law? We don't know.
Politas
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?
Rule one of globalisation (ie being dictated to by the US) - the country with the most enlightened position will take it up the arse.
Just what do you think art is anyway? EVERYONE builds on each others art. Rock built off of blues and jazz, and those off of earlier forms still. There is no 'original artform'. We are products of an environment of prior art.
That's why copyright extensions will eventually be lifted. Not because 'we the people' don't want it.
Because in the end corporations will have restricted their OWN ability to market creativity with flexibility.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
We do have disturbingly bad copyright laws. The same goes for libel/slander and a number of other areas.
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.
Read Pynchon.
While it's an understandable first reaction to assume that the FTA means that we Australians will be changing laws to match the seppos, the actual wording of the section on IP rights mentions that the agreement will "work to reduce differences in law and practices, in the area of patents, trademarks and designs".
Why not reduce differences in laws between the two countries by changing US law to match Australia's?
The DMCA: Democracy Means Cash for Americans
If you outlaw the law, only criminals will have laws
Legally, you must do all in your power to cast a valid, formal vote.
You are required to attend a polling station on poll day (get your name ticked off the register) and are required to legally dispose of your voting slip. There is no law requiring me to fill in the boxes correctly and place the voting slips in the correct box.
Will you be prosecuting for voting informally? Definitely not, since there's no way they can know.
I have walked into a polling station, grabbed my forms and had my name ticked off the register, and immediately walked out, dumping my forms in the bin (torn in half several times to prevent retrieval and use) as I go. I have done this in two seperate elections so far, and have been on the electoral role for 14 years. The bin sat right in front of the electoral officer who *could* have me charged if I broke any electoral laws (interfering with someone elses vote say?). They *can't* not know about that (especially sine I go out of my way to make sure they do), and they also can't charge me with any offence, because I did indeed "legally dispose of my voting slips".
And for the record, I'm not an idiot who doesn't give a shit about who wins the election (its never the voters, thats for sure), I'm just someone who refuses to vote if there is no decent candidate, one who prays for a day when the informal vote is counted and considered a vote of no-confidence in all parties involved.
Well, it makes a nice change to Australia.
:)
If you're white, educated and already rich, come on in (can you believe that our main source of immigrants is still the UK!?).
If you're downtrodden, 'ethnic' or otherwise disabled then try New Zealand
Read Pynchon.
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.
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
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/
Indeed -- and they corrupt and completely trash their source materials. Milne's Pooh stories are a good example of this, comparing the originals to the Disney-fied versions.
Culturally they are vandalising our heritage just like this "customised classics" moron -- just on a much larger scale.
deus does not exist but if he does
When this was first mentioned, 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, a professional organisation for librarians. They are following this issue, and may appreciate your input and support; their online journal also contains an insightful article 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, is of particular concern to Project Gutenberg of Australia (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 (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
Nope, not quite. From the SMH article:
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.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
But doesnt this treaty have to be passed by both the US congress and the Australian parliment before this (and the other measures in it) actually become law?
We all know how most congressmen only care about money (the same money paid by big american corperations to Bush to get him to push for these nasty things in the first place) so I suspect getting the trade aggreement passed through congress would be trivial.
However, in australia, it has to pass through the Senate. Now is the time for all aussies to pressue the parliment NOT to pass this totally UNFAIR aggreement that basicly gives the US everything it wanted for nothing in return. Just like the senate has rejected or ammended several other contraveral/crappy pieces of Howard Government legislation (much to the annoyance of Howard), it can reject (being a treaty like this, they cant ammend it) the FTA. (at least I think so, I dont fully understand how this kind of thing works here in australia)
In any case, regardless of what happens, one way to protest (against this and other things including the general "bush says jump, howard says how high" moves that have been going on lately) is to not vote for howard or his party.
Why wont the farmers in america accept a "gradual reduction of protection over 15-20 years"?
Reducing the protection gradually over that long a period would give them plenty of time to either get better (and still be able to survive in a lower-subsidy/lower-tarrif/lower-protection environment or if thats not possible, to get out of farming into something else.
Once upon a time Australia, and in particular the Liberal Party did not pander to every whim of the US Govt., in fact, Australia's Govt. used to have a backbone.
It would seem this is no longer the case (well ok, it hasn't been the case for quite some time, but Mr Howard's Govt. has really taken the cake this last term).
I'm exceptionally glad I put Liberal last in the recent Queensland elections. Roll on the National elections!
In the meantime, is there seriously anything we can do to stop this ?
David de Groot Snr Systems Engineer
In South Australia now, your literary works can outlast your corpse - burial plots only last 50 years (Hopefully that's pretty much the same as death + 50 years)
In south Soviet Russia, YOU outlast your literary works!
(/me ducks)
This is yet another example of the Auatralian Govt blindly following the USA, without any deep thought of the consequences. Frankly John Howard has butt licked George Bush so many times they should start sleeping together.
A few things should be noted about the agreement.
:P
1.) Its an all or nothing agreement, meaning if either government does
not pass all of the agreement terms then the whole agreement is
termed void
2.) The opposition parties to the current Australian government are
all against the main terms of the agreement, because they don't treat
Australian farmers fairly especially sugar farmers.
3.) The agreement wont go through because in the long run it
favors the Americans more than the Australians in many areas.
4.) Tariffs have been lifted in Australian industries that are
slowly being moved off-shore into Asia i.e.: car manufacture
5.) The US has lifted tariffs on goods that already have a highly
competitive market in the US.
These and many more things about the agreement will see the agreement
fail to pass the senate in Australia, so as far as Australians having
to participate in the imbecilic decadent patenting and licensing
schemes of the US, all I can do is just laugh he he he he he heeeee
Arash Partow's Philosophy: Be a person who knows what they don't know, and not a person who doesn't know.
The DMCA essentially outlaws the kind of reverse engineering which was necessary to create (and which is necessary to maintain) SAMBA and other pieces of FOSS which interoperate with proprietary software. And it just so happens that the folks who created SAMBA (hi Tridge!) reside in Australia. Now, if I put on my tinfoil hat juuust riight I can see Microsoft stomping on the one piece of software that allows the non-MS world to coexist with Windows, and just before the next version of Windows (with its obligatory changes to the networking protocols) sees the light of day. Coincidence?
The DMCA is the embodiment of a WTO treaty. This is the same WTO that people are protesting in the streets of Seattle, Quebec and Genoa.
You see, we techno-IP geeks (which we kind-of are) realize The Corporations are using the WIPO/WTO to shaft us -- Australia is just the most recent nation to fall victim -- these OTHERS are aware of their own areas. Artists talk about National Culture (arts, public broadcasting, museams, film production), people like Jose Bove talks about regional farming, farmers, land, food supply/quality, Maude Barlow and The Council Of Canadians speak about national soverignty, GM Biotech, etc etc etc.
What is happening is that Corporations are subverting social structures. In every facet of our culture, in every way, profit-driven organizations -- with incredible power, will and ability -- are un-democratically ruling.
In Feudal Europe, land-owners ruled. Peasants were lucky to have a 'job' where they were essentially powerless slaves, removed from decion making in their collective lives. Democratic Revolutions -- who's roots were in Ancient philosophies -- solved some of their problems, enabling the masses to exercise their will. Basically, one person, one vote. This was a 'better idea'. Then, in the late 18th century, some people began to see Democracy wasnt enough. Democratic control of the economy was necessary to remove the hammer and influence of wealth on society. Communist revolutions started around the world. Common people wanted to not only rule their civil lives but their economic lives via democracy. Many of the Communist Revolutions failed for various reasons... some survive today.
What(i belive) we are seeing right now, is the effective collapse of the Democratic Reovolutions. In the not-so-distant future, our very-own elected governments (already subverted) are going to create law that Over-Rule the rights of the Government to control The Corporations. These organizations will then assert feudal control over their segments of the economy -- nothing can challenge them (except maybe other corporations, but that is another discussion). Disjointed world-governance and the lack of a Powerful United Nations is to their advantage (it allows nations to be pitted against on another (Not joining the race to the bottom == starve more quickly))
Australia's new DMCA-alike laws are the embodiment of a WTO treaty, and not a surprise. Slowly but surely, all law will be removed that isnt 100% pro-corporation and pro-profit. There will be no other law*.
*you and the perpetual abortion debate/pageant does qualify as effective political discourse... dont be fooled by shiney things.