p2pnet.net News:- The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee report on the Copyright Amendment Bill 2006 has now been released (14 November 2006). This review was conducted in relation to changes to the Australian Copyright Act that most particularly concerned the circumvention of digital rights management and new fair dealing provisions. (See Australia’s DMCA, OZ Copywrong Bill and Australia’s draft DRM changes.)

Recommendations worth noting are:

1. That the Federal Government conduct a public awareness campaign and develop a ‘plain English’ consumer guide on the meaning and effect of the amendments contained in the Bill. (Making the assumption that they already know about the current Copyright regime)

2. That the Federal Government re-examine & amend the strict liability provisions in Schedule 1 of the Bill. (Abolition would have been better)

4. That proposed subsection 111(1) be re-drafted to make absolutely clear that individual consumers are not restricted to watching and listening to broadcast recordings in their own homes. (Basic cultural right)

5. Amendments with respect to format-shifting to specifically recognise and render legitimate the ordinary use by consumers of digital music players (such as iPods and MP3 players), and other similar devices. (So we might be able to rip a CD and have it on our mp3 player and laptop at the same time?)

6. Amendments to the fair dealing exception for research and study be clarified to make clear that only reproductions deemed to be fair dealings will be restricted and that the scope of the provision allowing any other amounts of reproduction will not be affected, if they are considered to be fair. (And they said the Bill was badly worded – this seems circular but its not)

7. Schedule 6 of the Bill be clarified to make it absolutely clear that libraries, archives and cultural institutions are able to make sufficient copies for the purposes of preservation.

12. Harmonising the language used in the definition of ‘technological protection measure’ in Schedule 12 of the Bill with the language used in the definition of ‘access control technological measure’, by replacing the phrase ‘in connection with the exercise of copyright’ in the definition of ‘access control technological measure’ with the phrase, ‘prevents, inhibits or restricts the doing of an act comprised in copyright’. (Making absolutely sure that these are not blanket TPM provisions)

13. The exception to liability for TPM circumvention to allow for interoperability be amended to ensure it allows interoperability between computer programs and data.

14. Schedule 12 be amended to prevent agreements purporting to exclude or limit the application of permitted exceptions under the TPMs liability scheme. (Good recommendation – well done!!)

15. That the Federal Government undertake a public review of the impact of the changes made to the Copyright Act 1968 by the Bill, after a period of two years of operation of the provisions.

While this report does cover some of the concerns raised in relation to the Bill, there are still significant areas that weren’t considered. This is perhaps due to the ridiculous schedule set for the Committee to consider the over 200 pages of legislation – a point the Australian Democrats were very keen to make.

Their preference was to pass only the provisions relating to the Free Trade Agreement obligations and to allow proper process for the rest… and they call themselves politicians!

It will be interesting to see whether the Federal Government accepts the recommendations. Keeping in mind that the TPM provisions are due to commence on January 1, 2007, there seems very little time to make any major changes and well —– and with a majority in the Senate it seems unlikely anyone can force the Government to do anything it doesn’t want to….

Sally Hawkins – p2pnet, Australia
[Hawkins is a former musician and songwriter who decided to study law after doing a course in Music Business Management in 1991; she's worked for various departments in both Federal and State Australian Government, holds a Bachelors Degree in Legal and Justice Studies (Criminal Law), a Bachelor of Laws (Honours) and is currently a postgraduate student with Southern Cross University writing a thesis on Copyright Law/P2P File Sharing.]

Also, “Just heard a fantastic talk back on ABC Radio National with the minister and lots of unhappy callers (including me) talking about problems with the Bill,” said Sally in a follow-up email.

“Changes to copyright law – should you care?” – asks the set-up blurb, going on:

The Copyright Amendment Bill is likely to be passed by the Senate before the Christmas break. The Coalition government believes amendments are necessary to make it tougher for copyright pirates and fairer for consumers. But others argue that the amendments don’t take into account changes created by the new communication technologies. Three copyright experts, Melissa de Zwartz, David Brennan and Matthew Rimmer join the Federal Attorney General, Philip Ruddock, to debate what these changes mean.

If you want to listen in, you’ll find it here. We’ve also stored a copy here, just in case.

Also See:
Light Reading – BitTorrent Video Store Delayed, November 13, 2006
went Hollywood – BitTorrent, Hollywood team up, November 22, 2005

---

p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 15th, 2006 at 10:54 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 1528 times