AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AMENDMENTS


Smh.com.au reports that Australia is in the process of reviewing its copyright law and the federal Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock is contemplating a change in the law that would allow time-shifting and space-shifting by permitting private copies of legitimately obtained works to be made in other media for private use.
"There's a reasonable argument for putting forward the opinion that when someone has bought something in one format and has acquired the copyright for it in that particular format then there is a fair use for them to take it to another format. I think it's a strong argument" ,
said the Attorney-General.

However, in accordance with the US-Australia trade agreement, Australia is to implement digital rights management legislation that will make it an offence punishable by up to two years in prison to decrypt copy-protection software. The fear is that the proposed new right to make private copies will be taken away by this DRM protection.


Infringers may face up to two years' prison: but will Australia have the courage of its convictions?

The IPKat notes that the Australians are taking a different attitude to the Norwegians, who intend to make copying on to different media a copyright infringement.

Everything you ever wanted to know about Australian copyright here
AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AMENDMENTS AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AMENDMENTS Reviewed by Anonymous on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.