Slashdot Mirror
Australia to Get Software Patents and Anti-Circumvention Laws
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.
Harmonization is always in the direction of the power. It doesn't have a thing to do with what's good for innovation anymore.
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.
Looks good for your age..
"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"
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.
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.
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.
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.
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
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... :(
As Thoreau said: Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just
man is in jail.
Organised civil disobedience.
"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt
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.
I do not moderate.
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.
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.
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..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
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.
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. 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. To the politicians on both sides, the net benefit outweighs the loss of innovation.
[% slash_sig_val.text %]
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.
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.
Or something like that.
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
Civil disobedience is the only out.
I fully sympathise.
.... what?
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 people, have simply given up on our rights and duties, happily trading them all for the comfort of
Somehow we have the concept of "civil disobedience". Disobedience against what? How can the public be disobedient in their own country? Who makes these laws that the public disobeys? Have we somehow installed a new ruling class of lawyers and politicians replacing the kings of old?
Just as the the parent poster I despair at the state of things. I'd like to advocate a revolution but I wouldn't know where or how to begin. I suppose I'm just too complacent about these issues and more than happy to give up my rights for some intangible benefit I'm sure I'm getting....
That's me done rambling and ranting and spewing incoherent thoughts at innocent bystanders. Thanks for reading. Move on now. There's nothing to see here..
"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.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Can anyone explain to me why government protection of industries can be called "free trade"?
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.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
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.
I think you are right.
But your attitude is not favorable for such an endevor. You need to think more Ghandi, less Malcom X.
Technical sophisticates are generally pro individual rights, anti corporate IP (as long as these individuals are more technical sophisticate than they are corporate-powermonger / capitalist-imperialist).
The solution then is to generate more technical sophisticates. Educate the people how to exercise the freedoms that are being stolen. People who can exercise these freedoms soon see the value of them. People will defend the freedoms they deem valuable.
As a US citizen and a Republican(I do realize this is an inconsitant position) I think free trade is bad. It works in the EU because there exists a ballance of relative captial. The poorest EU nation is only about 1/2 of the richest, compared to our NAFTA partners this difference is small, with the exeption being Candia our next nearest(in wealth) partner is Mexica at 1/6 of our economy. This inballance leads to some strange market behavior. I think people also need to admit that capitalism and free market work really great on the national scale, but really badly on the international scale. There are simply not enough players of relatively equal ability. I am talking number of individuals in a natial economy vs. National players in a global economy. Other then the EU which is fast organizing itself into a nation rather then a group of trade partners free trade is only creating loosers and no winners elsewhere in the world. Some mega corps might be winning but even the US as a whole is probably loosing economicly due to free trade. This has allot to do with the factors of production being way to mobile in the modern economy.
Now, that I have may almost made to breif case against free trade on economic terms, let me state it on some others. If every nation just adopts each others laws and policies to be "compatible" then why have their own governments? As a nation it makes some since to just being different then others. Think when you have an obviously two sided question like are software patents and anti-circumvention laws a good idea, try both. The Au is being dumb, there is a feeling against this and the US has done the other. So the prevailing opinion there is these are bad ideas. If the Au was smart they would follow their own gut reaction. Why? The already think not doing it is a good choice and the other players have gone for it. So if they don't do it and it turns out to be the choice that results in a stronger more inovative economy they might have a shot at becoming a dominante force, in those industries. Should'nt they want to lead the world in software technology rather then be one of the US followers. Why don't they want to have the next (hopefully more well behavied)Microsoft in Australia? The way to get it is to provide opertunity that does not exist in the US.
I am not routeing against my own nation here either I think the really thing that has hurt us most over the last 30 years is without the Soviets we have had no real competition. We might see new ideas get some traction here if people again saw success with inovative freer thinking else where in the world.
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 together from the smoking pile of wreckage that was one a thriving industry.
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.
Test 1 2 3 4
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 together from the smoking pile of wreckage that was one a thriving industry.
Or option 3, twist the drop in revenue into "proof" of rampant piracy and disregard for IP laws, then lobby for special taxes that go directly into Media, Inc.'s pockets.
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.
Ghandi lead people to collect salt from the Indian Ocean in defiance of the UK salt tax. The UK government arrested 100 people and shot 20.
Ghandi may have been a pacificist, but he wasn't a pussy.
"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." Ed Howdershelt
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.
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.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
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
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 have prevented the eventual passing of the bill. But that doesn't justify being part of the problem. A veto could possibly have brought the issue into public discussion. The general voting populous could take notice, and some of our elected officials might even have changed their vote.
And for the record, the above objection does not change the fact that liberals are as in the pocket as the conservatives. (Tepples, I realize you aren't claiming this.) The DMCA passed both The House and Congress unanimously. The Democrats are fucking us over just as much as the Republicans.
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...
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.
I agree that getting officials into the lower echelons are immensely effective at influencing the higher offices. However, that does not mean you should be voting someone you don't agree with into the presidency. Any vote for a third party does count. The more votes people see going to third parties decreases the view that those votes are 'thrown away'.
--LordPixie
There is a relationship between IP Rights and economic success as a nation.
Yes, there is. Those which ignore IP rights profit.
If you don't believe this, look at the history of the American colonies vs England.
Not technically correct.
The US grew massively during the early industrial revolution by IGNORING the IP laws of Britain.
We stole their patented weaving techniques and machines. We copied their methods of making steel. Everything that made us what we are, we borrowed, stole, or copied from Europe. Sure, we improved on it too, but not one cent was spent on 'licensing' it. And of course, with IP laws, they don't HAVE to license it. If the laws were as enforced then as now, England and Germany could have forbid their use, had the WTO exact penalties on us, and essentially keep us as a supplier of grain and cheap labor, and a captive market for their steel and goods.
( Interesting fact. Local production of iron was forbidden in the american colonies during colonial rule. All iron was imported, so the british govt and british makers could make a profit off the colonies. The US started as a captive market for British goods. )
The weaving machines that made England great? US businessmen stole the design. Since paper plans, if intercepted, would cause a international incident, they had a person MEMORIZE their construction.
All this rampant IP copying allowed the US to change from a agrarian to industrialized economy. Who does this sound like now?
If you suggest China with its rampant "IP Theft", and incredible GDP increases, you'd be right.
At least from my example, IP laws merely allow the fat cats to keep being fat cats, and keep developing nations from advancings.
Where would the US be if we had licensed everything from Germany or England? Where would we be if they had refused to license it?
I am more of a middle of the road kind of person, and find both the ultra liberal and ultra conservative aspects of both parties insufferable. I used to think that an independent approach was warranted.
However, after many years of reflection and observation I came to the conclusion that Libertarians/Independents will never make an impact on the political landscape - and are in fact, causing many of the problems we see in our government today.
First, I am very much appreciative of the Cato Institute, and I have much appreciated their stance on issues of human rights in the Padilla trial and this current stance on copyright protections.
I do think that you are right about government and two parties. One should also understand that the fact that a president must win over 50% of the electoral seats or the vote goes to the House essentially ensures that we will *always* have a two-party system.
However--- independent voices are often louder than parties because they are generally recognized to be independent. Also if lobbyists are largely volunteer (think Friends' Commitee on National Legislation) this also adds to their credibility.
Unfortunately on the issue of copyright terms, the general populace is in the dark and the fox is in charge of hen house....
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
It's really important not to lose focus over this whole patent/DRM/DMCA issue.
No matter which country makes what laws, the lowest common denominator for all of them is you and I, the consumer. We are the people that hand over money for these products and if we don't hand over the money, the products don't sell and marketing people start dying from coronaries.
Whatever you or I do or say now, the fact is that the global corporations have western governments in the palm of their hands through political sponsorship, lobbying and backhanded bribes.
Added to that, those same corporations, through hype, marketing and advertising, have turned their products into cool or must have products, the possession of which, you are told, somehow elevates you above the rest of the human race who don't own that product.
As consumers, all we need to do is just get some focus back in our lives and look at the wider picture when we spend our money on products that are heaped with patents & DMCA. I'm not suggesting abstinence (I like gadgets, games and music as much as the next man) but we need to be sure what it is our money ultimately finances before we buy any products.
I'm in my early forties now and my time for cool and conformity is over. But I look at the generations of people beneath me and I feel sorry for them because the majority seem to have become the puppets of the marketeers - designer clothes, Nike trainers, latest mobile phones, plasticised music - a bottomless pit of disposable income for the corporations.
Again, I don't want to deny anyone the right to spend their money how they want to but we must keep driving the message home that every time you buy a product, there is a risk that your money ends up limiting someone's freedom - either someone in the Third World's right to a decent income or your own rights to fair usage of products.
It's only when we grow up as consumers that we can stop buying heavily patented products & force the corporations to change...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Because the USA is currently the single biggest consumer market there is, no government wants to lose trade links with the US and so they all ultimately fear becoming isolated from the US from a perspective of imports & exports.
The only chance of there being a bigger consumer market is if the EU totally harmonises and becomes a fully-integrated European State - unfortunately, the EU is in a complete shambles because each member nation can veto on just about any resolution knowing full well that once they veto, they risk becoming isolated from the remaining states. While I admire the Netherlands making a stand on EU patent law, for example, they just run the risk of corporations simply refusing to trade with them in the future.
If the EU was organised enough to make a united stand on software patents, I guarantee they would fail the world over because trade would be hindered where patent law still applied and the EU would have an advantage.
Unfortunately, all governments are corrupt and financed by back-handers from the corporations so software patents will be enforced in the EU, given time.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
(disclaimer, IANAL and my recollection may well be flawed) ...a legal system where the supreme court has already told Big Media to get fucked over the concept of "DVD's are software" and ruled that they are for all legal purposes to be treated indentically to Video movies and, hence, bypassing region coding is LEGAL if it allows a person to view a LEGALLY ACQUIRED movie.
:) of net benefit to the country and our legal system (and that in the US) should tidy up any sloppy seconds.
ie: The Australian Supreme court has already ruled that you can not use the technological methods to obfuscate the actual function of an item; a dvd movie is NO DIFFERENT to a video movie beyond its sound and picture quality.
The same court ruled region zoning as an unfair barrier to trade. Government legislation CANNOT overturn case law until the legislation itself has been tested in court AFAIK. It has also found that you can do whatever the fuck you like to something you own as long as you dont break the law. Therefore it is legal to chip your PS2 to play Japanese games, but illegal to chip it to play pirated games; as well it should be.
Our judges here may be fucked up when it comes to dealing with criminal law (rapists and child molesters regularly get non-parole periods that do not exceed their natural lifespan), but are pretty switched on when it comes to managing civil law.
I dont know where the "no fair use protection" crap comes from either; Fair Use (not by that name) is implicit in Australian civil law, particularly as relates to consumer products. Our copyright law in particular has strong fair use protection.
The FTA is IMHO (I work in the manufacturing sector and regularly deal with US companies and we crap all over them in terms if flexibility and cost effectiveness, remove tarrifs and our crap is cheaper
Also, software patents are likely to be a hard sell, once again, IIRC, our Supreme Court has already ruled that software code is a publication protected by copyright law and, therefore, cannot be an invention covered by patent law. I am fairly certain the same is true of mathematical methods, although I could easily be wrong here.
Anyway, in summary; legislation ISNT law until it passes the courts and I think you will find the FTA itself allows for aspects deemed not legally binding to be overturned in the courts without validating the agreement, our Government is not allowed to make descisions which effect our legal precedent unilaterally, thats why we have separation of the powers between legislature and judiciary.
just my $0.02
err!
jak
Copyright is not inherently wrong. The GPL could not exist without copyright.
Patents are not inherently wrong, either. Software patents are.
I'll go check out your website though..
..and I'll form the head!!