Tweet
Australia appears ready to adopt U.S-style copyright laws, courtesy of a Free Trade Agreement deal negotiated between the two countries.
But the agreement has some Australian civil liberties advocates and lawyers crying foul. They say it's nothing more than a money-grab by the powerful U.S. copyright owners lobby, and claim the Australian government has sold consumers' rights to media conglomerates in the United States for dubious trade concessions in other industries.
"The United States is the biggest exporter of intellectual property in the world. They want other countries to amend their laws to make sure the U.S. has a captive market for these products," said Dale Clapperton, a board member of Electronic Frontiers Australia or EFA, an online civil liberties group that is leading the charge against the new laws.
Governments on both sides claim the agreement will increase trade between the nations, create jobs and stimulate economic growth. Australian Prime Minister John Howard, when announcing the deal, said it would inject $4 billion into the Australian economy, although Trade Minister Mark Vaile backed away from that number when it became clear the United States would not lift certain trade restrictions. Meanwhile, proposed intellectual property changes remain a hot issue.
The intellectual property reforms proposed by the Americans will require more changes to Australian legislation than any other section of the agreement. They will effectively bring the controversial U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (.pdf) to Australia, an idea vehemently opposed by consumer lobbyists.
The proposed legislation would affect what applications may be used with game consoles, DVD players and other electronics, and would potentially make some reverse-engineering applications illegal. It may also have implications for the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing and would require ISPs to remove content from users' websites upon receipt of a "good faith" request from anyone claiming to be the owner of an infringed work.
Consumer lobbyists say the introduction of DMCA-style laws will stifle innovation and make criminals out of ordinary people. Clapperton believes DMCA laws are especially inappropriate for Australia, where existing copyright laws are markedly different from those in the United States.
There's no enshrined right to free speech in Australia. There is no "fair use" provision in existing copyright law, either, under which people can copy portions of copyright works for personal or educational purposes. Copying a CD, cassette, vinyl record or any type of copyright sound or video recording, even for personal use or for backup purposes, is illegal. That includes the transfer of music from a legally purchased CD to an iPod, and in some cases using a VCR to record a television show for later viewing.
The excessive toughness of existing laws will be compounded by the changes, Clapperton said.
"It's a total sellout of Australian interests," he said. "Australia has to change our copyright laws to line up with the U.S. in all the ways that are good for big business, but not in the ways that are good for consumers. The Free Trade Agreement contains all the bad parts of the DMCA."
MORE > >
But the agreement has some Australian civil liberties advocates and lawyers crying foul. They say it's nothing more than a money-grab by the powerful U.S. copyright owners lobby, and claim the Australian government has sold consumers' rights to media conglomerates in the United States for dubious trade concessions in other industries.
"The United States is the biggest exporter of intellectual property in the world. They want other countries to amend their laws to make sure the U.S. has a captive market for these products," said Dale Clapperton, a board member of Electronic Frontiers Australia or EFA, an online civil liberties group that is leading the charge against the new laws.
Governments on both sides claim the agreement will increase trade between the nations, create jobs and stimulate economic growth. Australian Prime Minister John Howard, when announcing the deal, said it would inject $4 billion into the Australian economy, although Trade Minister Mark Vaile backed away from that number when it became clear the United States would not lift certain trade restrictions. Meanwhile, proposed intellectual property changes remain a hot issue.
The intellectual property reforms proposed by the Americans will require more changes to Australian legislation than any other section of the agreement. They will effectively bring the controversial U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (.pdf) to Australia, an idea vehemently opposed by consumer lobbyists.
The proposed legislation would affect what applications may be used with game consoles, DVD players and other electronics, and would potentially make some reverse-engineering applications illegal. It may also have implications for the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing and would require ISPs to remove content from users' websites upon receipt of a "good faith" request from anyone claiming to be the owner of an infringed work.
Consumer lobbyists say the introduction of DMCA-style laws will stifle innovation and make criminals out of ordinary people. Clapperton believes DMCA laws are especially inappropriate for Australia, where existing copyright laws are markedly different from those in the United States.
There's no enshrined right to free speech in Australia. There is no "fair use" provision in existing copyright law, either, under which people can copy portions of copyright works for personal or educational purposes. Copying a CD, cassette, vinyl record or any type of copyright sound or video recording, even for personal use or for backup purposes, is illegal. That includes the transfer of music from a legally purchased CD to an iPod, and in some cases using a VCR to record a television show for later viewing.
The excessive toughness of existing laws will be compounded by the changes, Clapperton said.
"It's a total sellout of Australian interests," he said. "Australia has to change our copyright laws to line up with the U.S. in all the ways that are good for big business, but not in the ways that are good for consumers. The Free Trade Agreement contains all the bad parts of the DMCA."
MORE > >
