Aussies Brace for DMCA 121
Rusty writes "Aussies are counting down to the introduction of the US-FTA-required DMCA legislation, and trying to pressure the government to listen to consumers and innovators, not just industrial copyright holders. Linux Australia has kicked off the campaign with iownmydvds.org
and iownmymusic.org."
Hang on a minute... (Score:3, Interesting)
What "US-FTA-required DMCA legislation"? The Australian AG's office only recently published revised copyright information that seemed to be fixing some of the silliness: time-shifting using VCRs, format-shifting of music, etc.
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically: Australia is establishing fair use, and then in the same swoop allowing content holders to take it away through DMCA provisions. The aim of all this is to make the laws as similar as possible to the laws of that great shit heap some like to call the US congress.
This all of course pails in comparison to what the USFTA is doing to Australian healthcare. You Americans bag Canadians public health system but Australia's is one of the best in the world. Since the Australian government buys all drugs, we are able to get them cheaper. But the big med companies don't like that. The only reason America made this trade agreement was to please the pharmaceutical companies. this copyright/patent stuff is just coming along for the ride
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:3, Interesting)
How does that differ from any other country's copyright law? You own the medium and a licence to use the content on it in certain limited ways. Some countries specifically allow you to (eg) media- or format-shift the content, some (including the UK and apparently Australia) do not.
However, those that do have such "fair use" clauses do *not* grant you the copyright on anything you buy. The exception to that, of course, is when you enter into a contract with som
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:2)
Agreed.
> You own the medium and a licence to use the content on it in certain limited ways.
Huh! That on the other hand I don't agree with nor do the copyright law. You own a copy of the work. There is no licenses involved and you can use it in whatever way you want with the exception being a few things that the copyright holder has the exclusive right to. All else is free ofr you to do and you do not need any license for it. Normal "use" is
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
Your tenancy has no default rights attached.
The terms of the tenancy are based on the license of that product.
Because the license is backed up with TPM and criminal legal penalties there can be no fair use.
So potentially:
You get to listen to the DVD if the DVD thinks you are a currently valid tenant/subscriber.
If the DVD has any kind of glitch or is not working in the DVD player youre using because youre in AU you lose
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:5, Informative)
Austalian politics would look weird in the USA - the federal government is made up of coalition of a populist right wing party that calls themselves the "Liberal" party combined with an agrarian socialist party who are far to the left on rural issues and far to the right on city issues. They do not have control of any state - so there has been a power struggle between state and federal government for years and their opponents are funded to a great extent by the trade unions and the Federal government is at this point trying to make the unions irrelevant to starve the opposition with some success. Generally Austalia does actually take a more liberal view than the USA on a lot of issues - due to most of the services and all of the domestic law enforcement being a duty of the states and due to many of the ruling federal party deciding that conservatism means doing nothing. Where the federal government has full responisbility, like immigration, the different ideology shows - with residency visas granted after donations to the party at one end and rapid mistaken deportation of our own citizens to countries at the other, and the officials responsible getting a bonus for each deportation (why check the paperwork when you can personally make more money rushing things through and there is no personal accountability?). There are some things a government should not be allowing the profit motive to interfere with for the good of the state - the for profit immigration detention centres were both a disgrace and a huge drain on the nations revenues. The USA may joke about pound me in the ass prisons, but in Australia male prisioners were raping female prisioners held in the same facility with no way to lock their doors and stop the same thing happening over and over.
Free Trade MY ARSE (Score:3, Interesting)
We got screwed, royally.
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
I think most people just do call it "that great shit heap" and not bother to call it the US Congress.
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
> You Americans bag Canadians public health system but Australia's is one of the best in the world.
You are not serious, are you? The Australian public health care is anything but good. Plus, under
our great visionary Tony Abbot, even what little was good in it is getting destroyed slowly but
surely. The fact that the US health system is possibly even worse (don't know, never lived there)
doesn't make ours any goo
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
I have a toothache, let's see the dentist (if I can get an appointment), $70 (if it's simple).
I feel constantly sick, do some lab tests, here's my Medicare card: No, thanks, do you have Mastercard?
My back is aching, let's go to physio, cheque, savings or credit, sir?
My knee is killing me, let's see, I can have elective for free, in 2 years, but if I can cough up
the money, I can go private now... Have cataract and
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
I was going to mention Cuba, but the last time I dared to mention a communist country I was drowned by cold-war rhetoric.
You mention having your child in a public hospital, have you seen public hospitals in the US and London (as the two obvious comparisons)? Fair enough compared to what we are raised to expect, they are shabby, but compared to what most othe
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:4, Interesting)
After you record a show from TV, you are allowed to watch it exactly once, after which you must *by law* delete it.
Yes, we finally get some of the Fair Use rights enjoyed by our US friends but it's not yet sane or sensible.
It's not ideal, but at least seems an improvement (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, I did think that particular example was daft. (I read several of the responses the AG's issues paper [ag.gov.au] and the AG's subsequent comments while preparing a submission of my own for the UK's Gowers review.)
That said, it's a lot less daft than selling VCRs but saying that all time-shifting is illegal, which seemed to be the case before. It might not be ideal, but at least things are going in the right direction. :-)
I thought some of the other provisions, such as the format-shifting I mentioned before, sounded a lot more reasonable.
Do you know what the article here is talking about? Both links were Slashdotted (despite apparently being cache links... go figure) and unless I'm missing something there's nothing mentioned by name to go and look up. What is this new legislation, and how does it fit in with the AG's issues paper and the review of the ACA?
Re:It's not ideal, but at least seems an improveme (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's not ideal, but at least seems an improveme (Score:1)
You must be paid up to be legal.
If you run out of license and are interacting with the content you are a criminal.
TPMs are a direct threat to developers and manufacturers.
For software developers and digital component manufacturers it means their competitors
can license permission to make products which interact with their product.
Interoperability becomes a franchise.
This would make it possible fo
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:5, Informative)
THIS Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement [dfat.gov.au] Article 17.4 section 7 details virtually the exact text of the US DMCA anti-circumvention law and section 8 details virtually the exact text of the US DMCA rights management information law, and reqires the Australian government to pass virtually that exact DMCA text into AU law.
7. (a) In order to provide adequate legal protection and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective technological measures that authors, performers, and producers of phonograms use in connection with the exercise of their rights and that restrict unauthorised acts in respect of their works, performances, and phonograms, each Party shall provide that any person who:
(i) knowingly, or having reasonable grounds to know, circumvents without authority any effective technological measure that controls access to a protected work, performance, or phonogram, or other subject matter; or
(ii) manufactures, imports, distributes, offers to the public, provides, or otherwise traffics in devices, products, or components, or offers to the public, or provides services that:
(A) are promoted, advertised, or marketed for the purpose of circumvention of any effective technological measure;
(B) have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent any effective technological measure; or
(C) are primarily designed, produced, or performed for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of any effective technological measure,
shall be liable and subject to the remedies specified in Article 17.11.13. Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied where any person is found to have engaged wilfully and for the purposes of commercial advantage or financial gain in any of the above activities. Each Party may provide that such criminal procedures and penalties do not apply to a non-profit library, archive, educational institution, or public non-commercial broadcasting entity.
(b) Effective technological measure means any technology, device, or component that, in the normal course of its operation, controls access to a protected work, performance, phonogram, or other protected subject matter, or protects any copyright.
(c) In implementing sub-paragraph (a), neither Party shall be obligated to require that the design of, or the design and selection of parts and components for, a consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure, so long as the product does not otherwise violate any measures implementing sub-paragraph (a).
(d) Each Party shall provide that a violation of a measure implementing this paragraph is a separate civil or criminal offence and independent of any infringement that might occur under the Party's copyright law.
(e) Each Party shall confine exceptions to any measures implementing sub-paragraph (a) to the following activities, which shall be applied to relevant measures in accordance with sub-paragraph (f):
(i) non-infringing reverse engineering activities with regard to a lawfully obtained copy of a computer program, carried out in good faith with respect to particular elements of that computer program that have not been readily available to the person engaged in those activities, for the sole purpose of achieving interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs;
(ii) non-infringing good faith activities, carried out by an appropriately qualified researcher who has lawfully obtained a copy, unfixed performance, or display of a work, performance, or phonogram and who has made a good faith effort to obtain authorisation for such activities, to the extent necessary for the sole purpose of identifying and analysing flaws and vulnerabilities of technologies for scrambling and descrambling of information;
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:2)
If it's a measure designed to control access to a protected work, and it's circumvented, it is not effective and therefore not covered.
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:2)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:2)
-
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
Because we're signatories to the FTA, we need to pass a law banning the circumvention of TPMs. The idea with this petition is to get a sensible law passed - something that bans thin
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hang on a minute... (Score:1)
It is exactly the shift from us owning a hardware/software/content product like a book
to being a subscriber or tenant of these things that is a problem.
With TPM it becomes criminal to discover Sony has put a rootkit on your system,
it becomes criminal to investigate Microsoft's spyware system which phones home
in readiness for their WGA with kill switch for systems running older versions(currently postponed).
It becomes criminal to
I started a new campaign (Score:4, Funny)
iownyourdvds.org
Wrong address. (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe you meant www.weownyourdvds.com ?
Re:Wrong address. (Score:3, Funny)
Obligatory... (Score:1, Funny)
Just when you thought it was safe to backup sounds and pictures... Coming this November...
www.AllYourMusicAreBelongToUs.com
www.AllYourMoviesAreBelonwToUs.com
There, none of your pining bastards can do it now. Had to get it out early.
Re:Obligatory... (Score:5, Funny)
www.AllYourMusicAreBelongTo.us
go one better (Score:1)
Re:go one better (Score:1)
The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:2, Informative)
*shameless plug* check my sig for details. */shameless plug*
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
they caved to us based lobbyists and adopted the DMCA..
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:2)
Not completely true. The EU directive doesn't have clauses about "access" to a work. The ponly protection included is those that control rights the copyright holder has. Acces is NOT such a one. The US DMCA on the other hand adds "access" as a sort of new right for circumvention.
Sure, some European countries has gone further than the directive and also added "access", but some has not.
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, circumvention of protection of actions that the copyright holder has exclusive rights on. Or if you want to look at it in some other way. Protection of something that would otherwise have been an infringement and nothing else.
>that's even worse.
Even worse than what? The US has the exact same PLUS the added protection for "access".
>us courts have determined that there is no real difference between enforcing a rights
>control and enforcing an access control.
B
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:2, Insightful)
DRM is not designed this way.. it is designed with the default as "deny".
In other words.. "protection" from any uses some unimaginative RIAA schill didnt think of.. all of which are fair uses, and "protection" from such democratic ideas as interoperability, format shifting, space
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:2)
>as "deny".
I have not discussed how DRM works or even discussed it at all. I was talking about the EU driective and the US DMCA and their differences. How DRM works is quite irellevant to that.
>no.. the us law explicitly stated that "rights controls" could be
>bypassed for fair use, this was later overturned because you had to
>circumvent access controls in order to access and disable the rights
>controls.
The US copyright law does
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
I do think about that.
The EU had almost 4 years to see how the DMCA impacted the US. They knew damned well what it was doing and how it impacted the citizenry and the marketplace. They sold out their constituencies anyway just so they could "jump off the bridge" hand and hand with the US. I hold nothing against the EU citizenry.. they are as much a victim as I am as a US citizen, but their govern
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
the lobby group which has hijacked the US trade negotiation system wants right of way.
The individual nations did not choose this DMCA. they were advised that there would be no trade agreement and in fact there would be trade sanctions against them if they did not accept this. There is an excellent book by Drahos, Braithwaite called Information Feudalism which describes the path we all took to get here.
This has not been an overnight
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
No I do not at all imply that you are spineless.. but these governments could take a stand on the principles of their people or their constitution (or both), and say "we don't need your trade agreement".
Especially the aussies and the EU.
These are developed economies with a lot of power here.. not arab emerites or third world backwaters to be pushed around.
As for trade sanctions.. the US would have a lot to explain if they sudden
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
However it is the path we got here by.*
As I understand it the response by the AU government was "What harm can it do?"
It is OK to suggest that they should stand up for what we want, but we have to be prepared to re-engage with the government and let them know when
the team on the otherside of the net is asking for something which is untenable.
Spines, brains, mouths and ears have to work all the way down the chain for us to
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:3, Informative)
Australia is not an EU member nation. It's not even in Europe, it's on a completely different continent on the other side of the world. Perhaps you are thinking of Austria?
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
the eu considers itself an ally of the US, cowtows to us policy, and sells out its own people for the sake of the US.
australia has a track record of the same.
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:2)
Well, it can't be the seventh state of Australia - It can be the sixth (since NT and ACT aren't states), or 8th if you want to be weird and count them as states.
Re:The allmighty dollar will win again. (Score:1)
Australia has six states:
Victoria
New South Wales
Tasmania
Queensland
South Australia
Western Australia
and New Zealand makes seven.
Leave it to us... (Score:1)
*claps*
Xserv
Re:Leave it to us... (Score:1, Interesting)
You paid good money for your CDs, and you expect to be able to play them anywhere, or transfer them to your iPod - or whatever cool gadget comes out next year. However, if the American music companies get their way, such transfers will be illegal. That's right: you won't be able to play your CDs on your music player!
What's going on here?
The Australia-US Free Trade Agreement requires new laws which prevent "circumvention of technological protection measures". Some companies want the government
Re:Leave it to us... (Score:2)
FTA Is A Joke (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, that works.
After about a year we find that US imports have nearly tripled, while Australian exports to the US have dropped.
Amazing surprise to some of us who spoke out at the time but were silenced by the scream of 'free money' from the US that so many thought they'd see.
The FTA also included a number of hilarious provisions like "you can export beef to the US in 18 years, unless they veto it in the meantime" and "bend over for our DMCA."
So now we welcome our US overlords, and hope that they don't brutalise our nation too badly when we become a new vassal province (or dare we hope - a state!). The national anthem never really caught on anyway. It has the word "girt" in it, which was too much for most Aussies.
Go DMCA! It's a bloody bonza idea, you beauty! (just practicing for the re-education camps)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:3, Funny)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:3, Funny)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:2)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:1)
Farming is a net drain on the Australian economy but the major media owners (especially the Packer family) make money from government subsidies so it's never reported as such.
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:2)
Lousy national party and their farm propaganda.
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:2)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of economics can tell you that this has more to do with the weakening of the US Dollar versus some sort of sinister plan to infiltrate your market with American goods. Even if you don't understand economics, common sense tells you that if something becomes cheaper, more of it will probably be sold, which is exactly what is happening in this instance. And
Wish I had mod points (Score:2)
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:2)
Yahoo shows it clearly:
http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=AUD &to=USD&amt=1&t=2y [yahoo.com]
The FTA came into force on Jan-1, 2005, and you can see the mean moving steadily downwards from around 76 cents to around 74 now.
Our government has shown time and again that protectionism is not part of their belief system, so I don't think we'll see tariffs coming in any time soon. In fact, when
Re:FTA Is A Joke (Score:1)
The default state for any technology is to assume you are illegal, not a subscribed customer,
and you must feed the parking meter to prove your innocence, permission to interact as a customer.
If you cannot afford the new license which asks for your firstborn in exchange for using the system for the next 24 hours and counting, or
if the parking meter is broken, or
if you want to make an alternative system but would like it to work with a propriatory one,
but your new product does not yet have a
Hurray! (Score:2)
"we've got spite and dedication as a vehement brew
the world hates us, well we hate them too
but you're exempted of course if you
come join us
independent, self-contented, revolutionary
intellectual, brave, strong and scholarly
if you're not one of them, you're us already so
come join us"
Thank you for showing the world that the US and the Brits aren't the only ones capable of complete and utter retardation in the new technological era we're trying to exclude ourselves out of.
rhY
Yet another DMCA-like (Score:4, Informative)
After the 2001 EUCD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Copyright_Direct
After the 2006 DADVSI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DADVSI) in France...
Ah, the beautiful FTA (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know what they feed him there in Washington, but it surely isn't healthy.
Re:Ah, the beautiful FTA (Score:2, Insightful)
Money most likely.
Re:Ah, the beautiful FTA (Score:3)
> but it surely isn't healthy.
I don't know, I think George W.'s sperm is probably full of protein and other good things.
Re:Ah, the beautiful FTA (Score:1)
Oh, that's easy. George W. Bush's cock.
And lots of it.
Decide Now Media Moguls - Which Way ? (Score:4, Interesting)
A: I buy a DVD, and I own it
B: I buy the rights to play the DVD... I can't copy it, however if I lose it I can walk into a store and take another one free.
Seems reasonable to me...
Wait
If I ever get nabbed for some stupid DMCA law, I'm going to very publicly sell my several thousand dollars of purchased DVDs to pay for some of my defence.
I think that will make the point...
Re:Decide Now Media Moguls - Which Way ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Revenge of Tommi Kyyrä (Score:1)
AUS-FTA is a joke (Score:2)
When the agreement is fully in effect, which will be sometime around 2017 IMMIC, its gross effect on the Australian economy will be an increase of 0.5% of current GDP. What a complete and utter fucking waste of time!
What's more terrifying is that the AUS-FTA is the likely shape of agreements hammered out with other nations in the future, a
Poor Bloaks (Score:1)
what's new? (Score:1)
Furthermore, we are currently _discussing_ another useless FTA, this time with China.
Re:what's new? (Score:1)
Well ok he's actually on the right, but you know the Labor party aint getting anywhere close to power in the near future.
Treaties trump Democracy? (Score:2, Insightful)
It looks like the politicians have figured out one more way to take away rights--use treaties. All they need is one other country to agree with them, and suddenly, unpopular legislation must be passed to comply with the treaty. And then, when "those pesky liberals" complain about losing their rights, politicians justify it by saying it was for free trade--as if that's supposed to mean anything good to Joe Schmo, who's most likely going to lose his job to outsourcing, and not have any civil liberties left
Re:Treaties trump Democracy? (Score:2)
AFAIR, treaties don't even have to be approved by parliament. (Some one correct me if I'm wrong). The enabling legislation is then a shoo-in as the govt. then just points to the treaty.
Free-trade treaty is an oxymoron anyway. How can something that thick make it EASIER to trade? Just makes it easier for the rich to rip us off and makes it harder for us to do anything about it.
Re:Treaties trump Democracy? (Score:1)
I've been wondering if there is a way to initiate a referendum in each the impacted countries simultaneously,
This would highlight the fact that the treaty process is not representative and is destructive worldwide.
This might be a simplistic approach but there needs to be some way to reconnect the law makers with the people who have to live by them.
It impacts consumers, developers, any small independent manufac
Slashdotted (Score:2)
Re:Slashdotted (Score:1)
If you would like to sign a petition you can also head to your local Linux user group.
Ed Felton has a good blog on DMCA as it is being used currently in the US.
He also has comments on the new incoming even nastier version being negotiated there.
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?cat=5 [freedom-to-tinker.com]
Kim Weatherall has info about the impact on AU from a lawyers perspective.
http://weatherall.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
Ive got a small blog with some of the implications for AU written for l
God damnit! (Score:1)
First they bring in the new regulatory laws so we can't even smoke in pubs and nightclubs any more - and I saw first-hand tonight what a real impact that has on the local pubs and clubs around where I live - and now we're going to get the MAFIA (Music And Film Industry Association) restrictions?
Australia is rapidly turning into another state of the US of A - looking over all the legislation, not just the IP stuff, that's been introduced lately -, and I am seriously wondering whether I should be putting
Re:God damnit! (Score:2)
For more about what Rusty is talking about (Score:1)
Also check out The petition [linux.org.au]
Australian American War (Score:1)
"Can you tell me what this Australian-American war was... I never really heard of it"
"God, not another one! The Australian-American war the was the biggest war since the big one! I tell ya, I didn't do two tours and take boomerang shrapnel in my head to come back here and have a bunch of hippies deny our history! Those Aussies were ruthless! They even wired kangaroos with explosives...come hopping in the camp and knock out t
Info stash about the impact of DMCA on AU (Score:1)
LinuxAU have a petition to sign to restrict the circumvention to nefarious acts directly tied to copyright infringement.
Contact your local lug to sign one, download one from the LinuxAU site below.
http://www.linux.org.au/law [linux.org.au]
I've been pulling together an info stash about the impact on AU of DMCA for layfolk.
http://www.lucychili.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
Kim Weatherall is a good place to start if you want to see the proposed DMCA law from the perspective of a lawyer.
http://weatherall.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_weathe [blogspot.com]
Re:FTA? (Score:2)
Perhaps you are more familiar with "RTFA"?
Re:Kill all billionaires (Score:1)
Seriously...
Re:Kill all billionaires (Score:1)
0, Insightful.
It's a secret insight as to what makes Slashdot so special.
Re:counting? (Score:1)
Get it onto talkback radio and I reckon it'll start to kick.
I've been trying to get to JJJ but havent had any joy yet.
Sign the petition and tell them.
http://linux.org.au/law [linux.org.au]
Layperson speak about the issue:
http://www.lucychili.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
Re:Let's get a few things straight (Score:1)
The libraries and some software development groups and some consumers are on record with concerns.
It has not been a very public process.
I have recently searched the ABC website for DMCA and was able to come up with a 0 response to the search.
It is probably not meant to be a public process.
It is not how law is normally drafted.
I would expect it is bypassing our legal community as well:
"The reality is that we do not sp