Slashdot Mirror
Draconian Anti-Piracy Law Looms Over Australia
ccozan writes to tell us of a law being rushed through the Australian legislature that would criminalize great swaths of the citizenry. The Internet Industry Association of Australia is posting warning scenarios spelling out how far-reaching this law would be. From the release: "A family who holds a birthday picnic in a place of public entertainment (for example, the grounds of a zoo) and sings 'Happy Birthday' in a manner that can be heard by others, risks an infringement notice carrying a fine of up to $1,320. If they make a video recording of the event, they risk a further fine for the possession of a device for the purpose of making an infringing copy of a song... The US Free Trade Agreement does not require Australia to go down this path, and neither US nor European law contain such far-reaching measures. We are at a total loss to understand how this policy has developed, who is behind it and why there is such haste in enacting it into law — with little if any public debate."
We at a total loss to understand how this policy has developed, who is behind it and why there is such haste in enacting it into law -- with little if any public debate.
Simple. Greed, those who stand to benefit from it, greed.
I know that you're only semi-serious, but it's an excellent point.
The counter-point would be that here in the well armed US of A, we have the DMCA.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Well, y'all can protest the old fashioned way - get thousands of your mates to go down to Canberra and sing "happy birthday" in the halls of parliament.
"Kid, whad'ya get?"
I said, "I didn't get nothing, I had to pay $1,320 and stop singing"
He said, "What were you arrested for, kid?"
And I said, "Singing 'Happy Birthday'"
And they all moved away from me on the bench there, and the hairy eyeball and all kinds of mean nasty things, till I said, "And creating a nuisance." And they all came back, shook my hand,
and we had a great time on the bench, talkin about crime, mother stabbing,
father raping, all kinds of groovy things that we was talking about on the
bench.
Apologies to Arlo Guthrie.
--
BMO
There is a simple solution: don't have anything to do with anything whose copyright is owned by ARIA and friends.
I've already put the word out to our extended family. No licensed products for our newborn son. Pooh Bear, Thomas the Tank Engine, Disney anything. All these trojan horses will be refused. I will allow the original books my Milne and Awdry, that's where Pooh and Thomas belong, in the books by their original authors. My son will be brought up in the knowledge that these are characters in a book, to live in his imagination, not on his lunchbox, bed sheets, or anything else. Licensed products are just too dangerous to have anything to do with.
From this point on I aim to only listen to copylefted music. Movies and TV? I'd rather have fun making a copylefted movie than killing my brain cells and liberty with an MPAA offering.
Maybe right after we have written to out politicians we should hold a protest in Sydney? Everyone brings their Pooh Bears and Disney characters, CDs, DVDs and we have a great big "cleansing" where we burn them in the streets and pledge to lead fruitful "copylefted lives"?
Customers becoming ex-customers. Now that would scare ARIA. If we can do it to Microsoft we can do it to the RIAA, MPAA and ARIA.
This is one of the only times that I'm proud to be an American.
... enjoy it while it lasts.
Well, I'm an American too, and I'm proud of what my country once was. I'm less proud of what it has become. All I can say is
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Because, since "happy birthday" does fall under copyright, and distributing something under copyright is illegal, it just is an actual, plausible case:
The company holding the copyright was purchased by Warner Chappell in 1990 for $15 million dollars, with the value of "Happy Birthday" estimated at $5 million. [1] While the current copyright status of the song is unclear, Warner claims that unauthorized public performances of the song are technically illegal unless royalties are paid to them.
Quote from wikipedia.
molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
I say sing any number of immature variations and claim fair-use as "parody".
The Jury system is designed in such a way that jury nullification is inherent to the system. Nobody can prevent it, not even the Judge. The most that he can do is set aside the Jury's verdict and hold a new trial.
It's a mixed bag for sure, as juries can allow bad people to get away with crimes, but (and I took this from Wikipedia) as "John Adams said of jurors: 'It is not only his right but also his duty... to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.'"
So, yea, you're wrong. It is a Jury's right and if you are willing to listen to one of the founding father's, it is a Juror's duty.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Draconian refers to overly strict punishment, not to what is restricted. Restrictions are not draconian, penalties are draconian.
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
I'm Australian, he was a national embarrasment; A walking, talking list of stereotypes we could have done without that turned into a (inter?) National hero because of a terrible freakish death.
Also, I think the joke is funny. :)
also, see Too Soon. link not safe for work unless you have forgiving colleagues. So I'd go with a No.
I heard about this on boingboing a while ago. it's a shame really, there's been bugger all media coverage at all, all I've seen is some major news outlets talk about a "new law that... may make ipods illegal *newscaster raises brow and tone*".
*sigh* it's so much more.
I think it's interesting to note, just for other Americans reading this, that were the US National Anthem subject to the same restrictions as Happy Birthday, it would only have come out of Copyright in 1913 (Key died in 1843, plus 70 years). Or if he had written it "for hire," it wouldn't have come out until 1934.
Notwithstanding the ridiculousness of having a 'work for hire' last longer than a work by a natural person, that's a pretty long span of American history that it would have been more or less unavailable for public use, in many of the ways we currently think of it.
The fact is, there are a lot of things that happened in the past, which would either be illegal under todays laws, or simply would be prevented from occurring. In many cases, we've never even considered these things in making the laws.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Which is why they used the word Draconian (which, taking a literal meaning as you are intent on doing, would mean "Draco-like" or "after the fashion of Draco") instead of Draco's, which would indicate the sort of posession you're talking about.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
And to expect enforcement to tend in the opposite direction!
I believe that legislators who truly value liberty--such as the founding fathers of the USA--will indeed err on the side of caution, because they know that zealous law enforcers, prosecutors, and politicians will try to abuse the laws as far as they can when it suits them.
My bicyles
Maybe they won't, but the point is that they could do this under the legislation as it is currently drafted, and the AG is refusing to remove strict liability criminal provisions against individuals in a non-commercial context - he's effectively just saying "trust me".
This sig is false.
Uhh, why does saying "fuck" not look good? And how is it unprofessional? I think it looks worse when people censor themselves.
... and then they built the supercollider.
http://www.ag.gov.au/agd/WWW/MinisterRuddockHome.n sf/Page/Media_Releases_2006_Second_Quarter_14_May_ 2006_-_Major_Copyright_Reforms_Strike_Balace_-_088 2006
"Will I be able to share my music collection with a friend?
No. You will not be able to sell, loan or give away any format-shift copy you make in a different format, but a friend can listen to your music with you."
That means the Zune 3 day sharing is illegal!
SBS News is where it's at in Australia. News reports from all around the world, and in many different languages. A very strong international focus, and top standards of journalism.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Anyone but John. Seriously. Vote as you see fit, but place the Liberal candidate last so there is no chance of them receiving your vote as a preference. Maybe put the Labor candidate second last? There are good independents out there. Also: NEVER vote for the same party in the Senate and House of Reps. Our current mess is a result of one party getting both houses (Labor would so the same as the Libs if they had both houses). Vote independent sand minor parties in the senate. Chances are a minor cndidate will better reflect your views than the Liberal/Labor party machine (which stands for itself).
"I think people in this country have failed to learn how Government works." .. either that, or you have failed to understand how the Australian psyche works. In Australia, the government is just something people elect so they have someone to blame (ie, abregation of personal responsibility). The reason Howard has lasted so long is because he feels more comfortable when people hate him. It's really a perfect match!
I live in Australia, and this sounds like total b/s. Who is going to enforce these rules?
Noone yet but it gives a handy tool for making sure there's something everyone is guilty of so if there's someone you don't like you could get him for a number of things noone sane would sue for.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Could the copyright argument go this far? If people sing "Happy Birthday" in defiance of who owns the copyright, it could be the slippery slope of disobedience that no government wants. They'd be teaching their kids, with positive reinforcement, that it's OK to disobey things you don't like.
bah.
The country name is not "America". The country name is the "United States of America".
Well my country name is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but you never hear people say that mouthful...
Let's create a new, CC-licensed, birthday song, and start using it in our parties. I bet our collective mind is able to create something better than the annoying, stupid, old "Happy Birthday".
Bonus points if it says something more interesting and meaningful than just "happy birthday". Double bonus points if the birthday person doesn't have to stand with a dumb look on their face while they wait for the song to end, and pretend they've enjoyed it afterwards.
(I'm joking, but replacing the birthday song at our parties and explaining the reason might even be a nice way to draw other people's attention to how stupid copyright law has become.)