Slashdot Mirror
Australia-U.S. Trade Agreement Takes First Strike
inflex writes "With the recent AU-US Federal trade ageement coming into force, the first signs of what is to come have started appearing with Sony unleashing a legal bid to clamp down on previously legal mods chips in Australia."
Here's the text:
Sony in push to outflank PS2 mods
Andrew Colley
MARCH 15, 2005
SONY Computer Entertainment Australia is planning a new legal bid to outlaw PlayStation modification chips following recent changes to federal copyright laws.
The devices override copy control mechanisms Sony builds into its consoles to block the use of pirated games and DVDs encoded for players built to operate in other regions.
Launching the Gran Turismo 4 game in Sydney last week, SCEA managing director Michael Ephraim said the company had instructed its lawyers to prepare a new court challenge to the legality of the devices.
The case would be based on amendments to the Copyright Act flowing from the US Free Trade Agreement in January, he said.
Sony's lawyers were preparing the case in anticipation of a High Court appeal overturning a decision in its favour, based on previous laws, handed down by the full bench of the Federal Court in July 2003.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr Ephraim said "the company would take more steps to crack down on street-level piracy in the second half of the year.
"We will wait for the outcome of the Stevens case.
However, Mr Ephraim said, "the world has changed a lot".
"So we will continue our fight against chipping on the PS2."
SCEA has engaged in a long series of legal manoeuvres to outlaw the chips since 2002 when it took legal action against backyard mod chip supplier, Eddy Stevens, in the Federal Court.
Sony asked the court to interpret parts of the Copyright Act outlawing the devices that circumvent copy protection mechanisms to include mod chips that Mr Stevens was selling.
However, Justice Ronald Sackville ruled in favour of Mr Stevens after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission intervened in the case.
The competition watchdog argued that Sony was using the copy control mechanism to erect artificial trade barriers between Australian consumers and overseas games and DVD markets.
Sony eventually won its case on appeal to the full bench of the Federal Court in July 2003. However, on February 8 Mr Stevens appealed to the High Court to overturn the decision.
Mr Stevens's legal representative, Gadens Lawyers, said the High Court had not set a date to give its decision.
The ACCC should have forced Sony to make a PS2 that had no copy control in it. They should also force the same on Xbox and DVD playing devices. For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, our consumer watchdog agency intervened in the PS2 mod chipping case stating that mod chipping must be legal as without it Australians can't by games from overseas to play on our PS2. As most games are released overseas before they are released here and games are often priced hirer here than they are to import, the ACCC ruled this was an artificial trade barrier.
They should have taken a harder stance, now we're gunna get fucked over by the stupid trade agreement.
How we know is more important than what we know.
If there's any Australians who still think Free Trade with the US is a good thing, just ask their largest trading partner how free trade has helped with softwood lumber, hogs, wheat, or anything else for that matter.
For those unfamiliar with the process:
- Blame Canada
- Impose tariff
- Ignore NAFTA rulings that don't support the tariff
- ???
- Profit
NAFTA was supposed to reduce trade barriers, but has only made them much worse. Push for binding arbitration in your FTA if you can't get out of it now. They will not listen to trade commissions, they make more money collecting the tariffs than they lose paying penalties.The free trade agreement changed into NAFTA when Mexico entered the picture.
Before free trade agreement, pretty much everything sold between Canada and the US had tariffs and there was no standard way to mediate the conflicts.
It's always easy to say that things are worst then they would be if something had been different but since there's no way to compare it's hard to actually demonstrate it.
Personnally, I think that the fewer barriers there are to trade, the better. The FTA and NAFTA both serve that purpose. I don't see how not having these agreements would stop the US from imposing tariffs. There were plenty of those before the agreement.