“Proposed new copyright laws in Australia dramatically lower the threshold for a criminal infringement, raising the prospect that having devices such as MP3 players or uploading a Web video of yourself singing along to your favorite song, could lead to serious penalties, critics say,” The Associated Press reports.
“The amendments have been introduced to Parliament and are being debated by politicians and experts before a final version of the bill is put to a vote, expected sometime next year,” AP reports.
AP reports, “Electronic Frontiers Australia, a nonprofit Online free speech group, said the bill vastly extends the scope of items considered used for copyright theft from strictly commercial machines like printing presses to personal devices like video players, iPod-type MP3 players and home computers. ‘Section 132(3) makes possession of those devices a criminal offense,’ the group wrote in a submission to a government committee examining the bill.”
Full article here.
Have fun paying for and attempting to prosecute millions of “criminals,” Australia. They’ll change Section 132(3) before it becomes law if they have even half a brain among them.
Contact info: http://www.efa.org.au/Campaigns/lobby.html#who
(sigh)… Think I’ll have Bologna today, cuz tomorrow is DEFINITELY TURKEY.
That pretty much eliminates any form of portable entertainment.
It’ll never work.
From the article:
“The proposals would make it an indictable offense — one that must go before the justice system — for someone to possess a device with the intention of using it to infringe copyright.”
Isn’t the Australian “justice” system as backed up as the rest of the “free” world?
Ahh…so they have to prove intent. That’s a bit more sensible. The way the MDN summary was worded, just owning a device as “foul” as a Personal Computer was enough to get you in serious trouble.
“I’ll give up my iPod when they pry my cold, lifeless fingers from it.”
“iPods don’t steal music, I steal music.”
“What we need are safer iPods.”
“No one has the right to keep and bear pods.”
“I have an unalienable right to carry any iPod I want.”
“Apple plans to sell automatic iPods with rapid search features and magnum-sized hard drives.”
“Gangland iPodding crimes on the increase!”
“You got a permit for that pod, boy?”
“If iPods are banned, only criminals will listen to music.”
“Please, don’t let childen use an iPod. Keep it locked in a secure place.”
“How many children will enter a life of crime because of these iPods? Think of the children!”
“See a pod, call a cop!”
“My daddy’s in jail ’cause he podded. (snif, snif)”
“What we have here, Watson is a smokin’ iPod.”
Thank God for Australian lawmakers! Now U.S. lawmakers are no longer the stupidest people on the planet.
And to think that Australia was settled by Britain’s criminals. How the pendulum has swung!
What will be illegal next? Sex? Cheese?
I thought that Australia was originally settled by criminals anyway. If everyone is a descendant of a criminal, it just makes sense that they all are criminals. Sounds like Parliament is just reinforcing that.
“From the article:
“The proposals would make it an indictable offense — one that must go before the justice system — for someone to possess a device with the intention of using it to infringe copyright.”
I suppose you are trying to say that this is no big deal? However, the phrase you emphasized does not mean that this only applies to hardcore pirates. It is meaningless without the context of what constitutes copyright infringment in Australia. If ripping a CD and transfering to an iPod is considered copyright infringement, then this is a seriously fucked up law. I wouldn’t worry about mass arrests, but I would worry that content providers will use this as leverage to have hardware makers cripple their technology or extort them for $ for each unit sold, which consumers in that country will pay.
Realist, my ass.
Possession of a personal computer is a criminal offense? Now, that is real stupidity!
MW: schools. How many schools will be raided and teachers and students arrested for using PCs. This is exactly like the thinking(?) behind outlawing so-called drug paraphernalia.
And we still send our criminals there, although its not much of a prison anymore. Russsel Crowe seems to come and go as he pleases…
From criminals they came – To crime they go.
Not sex or cheese maczealot, although I’m sure they’d love to restrict the former now that the High Court has effective given them carte blanche over state governments.
However criticising the government can be regarded as ‘sedition’ under new anti-terror laws, which they have used against peace activists. The same laws can see a person charged with an unspecified crime, which you cannot defend yourself against because the government deems their evidence “top secret”. You may not even be allowed to appoint your own legal counsel, instead having to rely on someone the Government chooses. And this is after you have been “disappeared” so the Government can interrogate you. Oh, and after you’re released if you tell your family or friends what happened to you, you can all go to gaol.
This Government behaves in a very totalitarian fashion with an insidious conservative agenda. They are also corrupt as hell. Afterall, it was under the Howard’s Liberal Party (as in liberal economics, everything else is extremely conservative) Government that the AWB (Australian Wheat Board – a government body) paid kickbacks to Saddam Hussein at the very same time we were preparing to go on that disastrous military adventure in Iraq. So effectively, a conservative Australian Government was funding the Butcher of Baghdad’s weapons programs.
Therefore you have to ask, why aren’t that lot rotting in Gitmo instead of David Hicks who’s guilty of nothing more serious than being misguided and in over his head – he never pulled a trigger, never hurt another human being, yet he’s been imprisoned in Gitmo for 5 years now and still no closer to a trial.
Justice delayed is justice denied!
If it aint broke dont fix it
You know who I blame for this? Commie liberals!!! Go hug a tree and stay out of our lives, you lib commie bastard commies!!
Hold on…If I’m already a criminal, will the iPod turn me into a respectable citizen?
So, does this mean that people travelling to Australia won’t be able to take iPods on those long flights, lest they end up arrested and fined up the ass just for being in possession of one (regardless of the content on it)? It won’t bode well for their tourism industry if every potential tourist with a pair of headphones is in jeopardy of breaking multiple laws by doing somethng so harmless…
Probably not very good for international business either if Australian Customs Agents will be searching everyone’s laptops at the airports for a copy of iTunes (or similar software) and/or audio files, and heaven help you if they decide that simply having the laptop itself is sufficient enough to detain and charge you for committing an offense. Remember, when travelling to another nation, you are subject to THEIR laws.
Frightening… VERY frightening. 🙁
Zach:
Oh gawd…. just shut up and go back to the schoolyard, you dumb little sh*t.
Just arrest and prosecute the families, kids and grandkids of the legislators in the first wave; that’ll change the law in a hurry.
Sad thing is this:
The UK and US will watch. If the law passes, guess what’s coming to your country next.
The recording/movie/TV industries are in deep trouble if they think the answer to becoming irrelevant is suing your few remaining customers.
MDN magic word: Writing, as in “the writing is on the wall”
MDN quote:
“They’ll change Section 132(3) before it becomes law if they have even half a brain among them.”
Remember, this is the same parliament that thought that taking guns away from law abiding citizens would stop criminals from committing crimes w/ guns (which BTW are on the rise in OZ). So no, they don’t half a brain among them.
Ted
Just to clarify, a couple of points:
1. I have the original SMH article entitled: “Hold those phones, rockers, soon your recordings will be a crime” and AP has made a glaring mistake. The maximum fine is $AUS6600 not $AUS65000.
2. The laws are a response from lobbying from the Australian and American record industry representatives, as well representations from US government officials to bring Australia’s copyright laws onto line with America’s as part of the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement.
3. The law makes it legal to upload material from a cd you own onto your own ipod (or second rate clone).
4. Under existing legislation it is illegal to record a television show or back up your own music and everyone does it anyway.
5. The intent of the legislation is to also go after people who “upload movies, television programs or movies” onto the internet, but is likewise vague about the situation where people who simultaneously download and upload as per P2P. My reading of the proposed legislation leads me to think that the intent is to prosecute these people as well (which nowadays would be the equivalent of prosecuting people for recording television content).
6. While the legislation makes it legal to back up music onto a cd it will make it illegal to back up music you purchased onto a dvd. I guess the government members don’t have large music collections. (Then again the Australian Prime Minister John Howard is on record as saying he likes Bob Dylan’s music but doesn’t listen to the lyrics.)
This could be linked to recent warnings from Australia’s High Court to music industry representatives. These people, in non-criminal copyright prosecutions, have attempted as part of their court submissions, to ask for damages based on the spurious argument that everyone who breaches copyright, would have instead purchased a cd or dvd. The High Court could not accept this argument. The Court would not agree to the link of a copyright breach automatically equals a lost sale. However, in criminal proceedings a decision it’s not based on damages to an allegedly agrieved party, rather it’s about a breach of laws.
The laws seem to be drafted by people who have no idea of what the effects of these laws will be and has little understanding of what is really happening in the real world. Given that the Australian government has control of both houses of parliament this legislation will become law.
There’s an old saying in politics that goes something like “You’re only as good as your opposition” and seeing as the Australian parliamentary opposition is largely in disarray, you end with little if any debate (one day for submissions) and this leads to bad laws.
My apologies for being a little long-winded in this explanation but trying to put this legislation into a meaningful context just ain’t easy.
maczealot,
You lot banned Vegemite a couple of months ago remember? That stuff’ll put hairs on your chest and is actualy good for you.
To: Aussie
Re: US Vegemite ban(?)
Um, according to Snopes.com, there is no ban on Vegemite, (although there IS a concern about an additive used in the product), so in the future, you might want to check the accuracy of your facts before you start throwing such allegations around. ‘K, thanks.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
http://www.snopes.com/food/warnings/vegemite.asp