New Copyright Laws Risk Criminalising Everyday Australians

[Chief]

http://www.iia.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=517&Itemid=32

“As an example,” said Mr Coroneos, “a family who holds a birthday picnic in a place of public entertainment (for example, the grounds of a zoo) and sings ‘Happy Birthday’ in a manner that can be heard by others, risks an infringement notice carrying a fine of up to $1320. If they make a video recording of the event, they risk a further fine for the possession of a device for the purpose of making an infringing copy of a song. And if they go home and upload the clip to the internet where it can be accessed by others, they risk a further fine of up to $1320 for illegal distribution. All in all, possible fines of up to $3960 for this series of acts – and the new offences do not require knowledge or improper intent. Just the doing of the acts is enough to ground a legal liability under the new ‘strict liability’ offences.”

Professor Brian Fitzgerald, head of the School of Law at QUT added his concern: “We assume the new broad ranging laws will be enforced. If the Government intends that they are not, then we want to know why the provisions have not been more carefully drafted to target commercial scale piracy rather than Australian families.”

 

[Hap Hapablap]

is this a practical joke chief? i mean its bloody happy birthday. who the hell bloody created it that have the rights doing it. so what at a park and all little kids are there and they are all singing happy birthday you could expect the coppers to come along and fine you?

 

[Crosby87]

That would be the person who copyrighted it. If you notice in movie credits, the song "Happy Birthday to You", or whatever it's called, is always credited, because the studio has to pay for it to be included, just like any other song.

Which is why in the example, you would have to pay to use it in a public place, which is ridiculous. But, money is king these days.

 

[Dasher39]

is this a practical joke chief? i mean its bloody happy birthday. who the hell bloody created it that have the rights doing it. so what at a park and all little kids are there and they are all singing happy birthday you could expect the coppers to come along and fine you?

No joke mate, I read about this a week or so ago.

Another example they used was simply recording a program using a VCR to watch at a later time. Under new Copyright Laws the government are attempting to get through, that would then be illegal as it is in breach of the copyright of that TV show.

These new laws are a damn outrage! What about Foxtel IQ where the whole point is being able to record and watch back. Are we suddenly all criminals because we do that?

Even uploading music from a CD to the computer would be deemed illegal.

Absolute bloody joke!

 

[linger_isgod]

Putting music on an iPod = illegal.

Can't have two copies, and because you have one copy on computer, and another on iPod, you're breaking the law.

 

[Dry Rot]

is this a practical joke chief? i mean its bloody happy birthday. who the hell bloody created it that have the rights doing it. so what at a park and all little kids are there and they are all singing happy birthday you could expect the coppers to come along and fine you?

No it's not and a lot of people in the IP field are very concerned. Anybody know why they are going over the top?

Given the amount of fine per offence you could easily be done tens of thousands of dollars with some VCR tapes, burnt CDs etc, with non-payment = gaol time.

 

[Hap Hapablap]

ffs without a doubt this is crazy thats it all birthday parties at houses.

 

[Mr Eagle]

Well the current laws, if read strictly, say that it's a criminal offence to videotape things off television. Hasn't stopped anyone in practice.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'll just sing the Beatles version then.

 

[rick James]

Could you imagine being the guy whose job it is to actually arrest people for that or hand out fines?

Short life expectancy I reckon

 

[Gabbie]

For those of you who can remember that famous clip, all i can say is Marilyn Monroe's lucky she's no longer with us then.

What a load of old cobblers. What sort of clown would be that anal to delve into something so trivial. Geez, what next, ban "For They Are Jolly Good Fellow" when someone has done well.

FFS it's about time we as people extracted our digits and in the words of Peter Finch in Network, put our heads out the window and yelled as loud as we can "I'm Mad. and i'm not taking it anymore"

 

[SthnX]

the government has no idea.

 

[JuddyisGod]

recording shows from a vcr has never been legal. You dont see too many people being dragged out of the house by the coppers to the big house for this. Will have no effect on the average punter.

 

[Sanguinarius]

recording shows from a vcr has never been legal. You dont see too many people being dragged out of the house by the coppers to the big house for this. Will have no effect on the average punter.

then why have the law if you're never going to enforce it?

same with these new laws. it's stupid.

 

[Monkster]

Firstly, Happy Birthday is not under copyright in Australia.

Secondly, I thought the new laws were supposed to be relaxing copyright restrictions? e.g making it legal to videotape things from TV, making it legal to rip mp3s of cds you own, making it legal to parody songs for public broadcast.

Thirdly, if it is indeed true that you can be fined for public broadcast of copyright material (such as in the case of the happy birthday example) where does that leave cover bands?

 

[Mr Eagle]

Thirdly, if it is indeed true that you can be fined for public broadcast of copyright material (such as in the case of the happy birthday example) where does that leave cover bands?

Cover bands are already an issue under current law. In short, you are meant to pay http://www.apra.com.au/ a fee and you can then cover any of their members' songs. This is part of the compulsory licensing provisions of the Copyright Act.

 

[Monkster]

Cover bands are already an issue under current law. In short, you are meant to pay http://www.apra.com.au/ a fee and you can then cover any of their members' songs. This is part of the compulsory licensing provisions of the Copyright Act.

I didn't know that, does that cover DJs as well?

 

[- PC -]

Putting music on an iPod = illegal.

Can't have two copies, and because you have one copy on computer, and another on iPod, you're breaking the law.

Yet George Bush has one

I asked the question then how was he going to get his music. I guess he can go to Apple or Sony and pay

 

[Monkster]

Yet George Bush has one

Putting music on an ipod isn't illegal under US copyright law.

 

[Mr Eagle]

I didn't know that, does that cover DJs as well?

Pretty much anyone who plays copyrighted material in public - this even extends to background music in shopping centres and the music you hear when you get put on hold!


(this is also the rule that allows politicians to use songs in their campaign material even if the artist won't give consent for them to do so...so long as the campaign warchest is willing to pay.)

 

[PHX]

Secondly, I thought the new laws were supposed to be relaxing copyright restrictions? e.g making it legal to videotape things from TV, making it legal to rip mp3s of cds you own, making it legal to parody songs for public broadcast.

There seems to be some massive confusion between the old and new laws.

The current laws make it illegal to record TV shows and change the format of copyright material.

The new ammendments will make it legal to record a TV show and watch it, only once and it must be recorded over asap mind you. And it allows format changes so you can rip CDs to MP3s and put them on your iPod.

The article is a bit concerning but who is really going to enforce it??? We have been criminals for years anyway taping shows and ripping CDs.

It wont effect the common person anyway like the previous law but at least you can feel good that you're acting legally with the new ammendments I suppose.