Fair Use and Other Copyright Exceptions (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

Attorney General's Department - Copyright - Review of Fair Use exceptions

Ruddock considers overhaul of copyright laws
By Katharine Murphy
April 25, 2006


THE guilty pleasures of taping Desperate Housewives and watching it later or listening to your jazz collection on your iPod could shortly become legal under changes to copyright law being considered by the Howard Government.

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock has signalled he favours a relaxation of Australian law to allow people to enjoy copyright material at their leisure and on the format that suits them.

The change, which is expected to be debated by cabinet in coming weeks, could legalise "time shifting" - where consumers record programs and watch them later, and "format shifting" - where digital material, such as a CD recording, is transferred to a different device.

Both practices, while everyday events for many of us, are technically illegal.

But consumer groups and some academic lawyers are pushing the Howard Government to launch a more comprehensive overhaul of Australia's copyright law.

They have lobbied for the introduction of the doctrine of "fair use" - a broad legal concept that exists in the US, which could give Australian consumers more free access to copyright material.

The Government has been given a range of competing views through more than 160 submissions during a 12-month inquiry undertaken by Mr Ruddock's department.

The Age believes that senior Government players also have different ideas about how to balance the rights and interests of copyright holders and consumers. Mr Ruddock has floated the option of legalising copying for private use with a number of industry organisations.

The Government has also discussed separate options with disability and educational groups that regularly deal with format shifting problems in meeting the needs of clients.

But even a modest relaxation of copyright law will face strong resistance from copyright owners and producers, particularly Australia's television networks, which have lobbied strongly against any change.

The Nine and Seven networks lodged a strongly worded joint submission to the review, arguing that any relaxation of the law would encourage piracy.

The looming change is prompted in part by commitments Australia made under its recent landmark free trade deal with the US.

Mr Ruddock would not comment yesterday.


Source: The Age

Of the three positions noted within the article (status quo, partial relaxation, complete overhaul), which one do you think represents the best way forward? Is it necessarily the most practical option?

 

[transcendent]

Well on status quo, who here has NEVER taped a television program or a radio program? This has been illegal for how long? And for how long have people been doing this? How many people have been charged for taping a movie to watch later? I mean great, the law has changed to suit contemporary society but what does it mean? It has stopped people from recording things before so now it's just saying, we are letting you record. Difference being? We can't get sued for it now? Laxing of laws means people will find ways to exploit them, not that they haven't before but that now they can't be charged. If it means I can do what I've been doing without being charged for it great, go ahead and change the law, but I don't believe in a complete overhaul.