Australia-US Free Trade Agreement Examined

PeterBecker writes "An evalutation of the impact of the changes Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement is available from the Australian Parliamentary Library (Research Paper #14). It takes a very critical stance, with statements such as "IPRs fit awkwardly in an agreement that has the aim of advancing free trade." and "While there has not been a comprehensive economic evaluation of IPRs, the Productivity Commission has found that, as a net importer of IPRs, Australia would lose more than it gains by strengthening IPRs. The net economic impact is thus likely to be negative.". Interesting read especially for those of you who might be affected but missed the fact thanks to close to no coverage in the mainstream media."

Comments

DMCA - Our gift to you, Australia!

[Gavin Rogers]

Thanks to the free trade agreement, Australia is now likely to get DMCA-like laws.

Our copyright law is already strict - we aren't allowed to copy a CD that you own to tape to listen on a walkman or in the car and we have no "fair use" copying for backup purpose. Now add the DMCA.

Tack on to this the extension to the copyright period for most works approaching 90 years and we have to ask ourselves, was this "free trade" agreement worth trading in our reasonable copyright law in exchange for selling some more sugar, wheat and wool in the US market?

Re:DMCA - Our gift to you, Australia!

[arlandbayes]

was this "free trade" agreement worth trading in our reasonable copyright law in exchange for selling some more sugar, wheat and wool in the US market?

Actually, the "free" trade agreement exludes sugar exports. The Florida cane growers have quite a bit of influence with Bush since it is such a pivotal state under the US electoral system.

plenty of coverage, just not this issue.

[mabinogi]

We heard plenty of coverage about the agreement, but most of it was complaining from Sugar farmers......

Baker & McKenzie FTA IP Symposium

[samj]

I recently attended The US-Australia Free Trade Agreement and Intellectual Property - A Symposium which was hosted by the Baker & McKenzie Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre, UNSW Law Faculty. You can find the transcript here, and mp3 sound files here, here, and here. It was a most interesting presentation, although in some ways I think it missed important 'features' of the FTA. Features which affect us all like most of Chapter 17, especially the introduction of DMCA like laws. More time was spent discussing mostly irrelevant issues like the 'protection' of information that may otherwise be cached by ISPs. The site is a good resource nonetheless - it's just unfortunate that people don't know what's good for them and are more interested in irrelevant news than items which will actually make a difference to them.

Oh dear, I hate Free Trade Agreements

[Claire-plus-plus]

Well from an Australian perspective this looks bad but it would have been possible to turn it to our advantage. A tightening of IP rights would hurt us in that we seem ot rely on importing IP because the government here is intent on pumping all the funding into primary industry. It is hard to get government assistance and funding for any business that trades in tertiary and secondary industry as the government has this insane idea (founded on our traditions) that the way forward in Australia is still "riding on the sheep's back".

However, Australia is one of the top countries in the world for education and literacy. For research purposes in Software Engineering we have 2 of the top 15 universities in one city (Melbourne). If the government were to change their ideas of what Australian business is and what our exposts should be we could become a net exporter of IP. Currently we are a net exporter of tertiary education.

Re:Short Answer

[TDRighteo]

Perhaps. Going off the current figures from www.aph.gov.au, the current scoreboard is:

Government (Liberal & National) 34
Labour 28
Democrats 7
Greens 2
Progressive Alliance (Meg Lees) 1
One Nation (Len Harris) 1
Independants (Harradine & Murphy) 2
---
Total 75
+ Casting vote of senate president (Lib)

The ALP currently look unlikely to vote for the FTA. The Democrats and Greens I believe have both stated they don't plan to vote for it either. This leaves the government *requiring* the four votes left:

Lees (South Australia)
Harris (Queensland)
Harradine (Tasmania)
Murphy (Tasmania)

Harris *might*, but One Nation didn't like things like this previously, so he's iffy. Lees... was a Democrat once, but who knows now. And the two independants are also questionable.

The odds are against it at the moment, but a few letters to senators can't hurt:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/index .htm

NIEIR FTA report

[quinkin]

The Age has an article on the report compiled by the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) for the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union.

To summarise:

• A federal government commissioned study of the agreement, which found it would boost the Australian economy by more than $6 billion a year, was out of touch with reality.
• The deal could cost Australia around $52 billion within two decades, largely due to Australian governments surrendering their control of key policy decisions. This would be most felt in knowledge-based industries, with American companies likely to overwhelm their small Australian opposition, wipe out competition, withdraw domestic investment and take profits offshore.
• The study also put a cost to the proposed changes in copyright laws in Australia, that will extend copyright protection by 20 years, in line with the US. The NIEIR found this change would benefit the Disney Corporation, which has pushed the copyright extension in the US, at a $450 million cost to the Australian public.
• Changes in the copyright, pharmaceutical and knowledge-based areas, and restrictions on the ability of Australian governments to act in the country's best interests, all meant the deal was not in the national interest.
• It found the average loss of jobs would be around 57,000, but in a worst-case scenario, it could rise to 195,000.

Well that just sounds wonderfull...

Q.