Australian Copyright rantings overview  #
Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 04:51PM
The last few days of demented ranting about copyright was kicked off by a review of the Amazon Kindle EULA.

What got me thinking (and ranting) was the concern that the realities of moving into the world of selling digital content hadn't been considered in today's copyright law, and that copyright law at times actively conflicted with what people and businesses are doing right now.

I was, in most cases, worrying about nothing.

Part of my confusion was the differences between Australian copyright law and U.S. law. U.S. has various allowances for "fair use" which EULA and DRM typically actively prevent (for example lending and second-hand selling of content). Australian law also respects DRM and EULA, but it is much cleared about it.

Australian law was recently updated to specifically allow the kind of copying the digital world requires, and everything it suggests is fair and reasonable in the context of everything... except video (more on that below).

Some copyright.org.au PDF fact sheets you should read:

Under the 2006+ Australian copyright law, "space shifting" is allowed for audio recordings. This specifically allows the legal use of iPods, or, the legal purchasing of digital content and then copying of that content to your music player (therefore having two legitimate copies).

"Space shifting" only applies to audio recordings. Other formats (including audio) are covered by "format shifting" which allows the user to copy their legally owned book, video, photograph, audio recording etc. but only to a new format. That is, you can copy a book to a PDF, but not photocopy it. You can copy a commercially bought VHS to your computer, but not to another VHS. This would mean you can copy a CD to an MP3, but not to another CD, except that this CD to CD copying is specifically allowed under "space shifting".

The law also appears to indicate that if the digital service you are buying content from includes a EULA, that the EULA can override your copyright rights. For example, iTunes allows you to make X number of copies of your purchased songs.

These 2006 changes were reviewed in 2008. The outcome of the review was to leave the laws as they stand (to be reviewed again in the future), but the final review report is fascinating reading as it discusses the various arguments for and against extending or reducing the rights provided by space and format shifting.

One point that doesn't appear to be covered in the fact sheets that I'd like to comment regards "reselling" digital content. I can't actually see anything in the law which would prevent reselling digital content except that:

  1. it is never legal to sell a copy of something, you can only sell the original
  2. once sold, you must destroy any copies of that content you have
  3. if a EULA attached to the service you bought the content from specifically prevents you reselling that content, that EULA still applies

Point 2 is fair enough. I've read a few people actively complain about this, but I find no reason why anyone should be allowed to buy a CD, rip it, then resell it and expect to keep the copy.

Point 3 is a little irritating but hard to complain about... except that nobody reads the EULA. I personally believe if the EULA specifically prevents you doing something with the thing you're buying that you would normally be allowed to do, it should be very clear, and the content should be cheaper as a result. How to enforce that...

Point 1 is where the main difficulty lies. You cannot buy an MP3, then burn it to a CD and sell the CD. You can only sell the MP3, and the original MP3 you bought, not a copy of it. In reality this means you simply can't sell it because it cannot be given to anyone without making a copy of it (from your PC to theirs, from your PC to some kind of digital media).

The only circumstance this might be possible is if you downloaded it to your PC and then sold your PC.

The law might allow you to copy the MP3 to a USB drive, delete the MP3 from your computer, and then sell the USB drive to someone. I'm not completely sure if this counts as a format shift... I don't think so.


Copyright: Fair use in Australia  #
Thursday, 12 Nov 2009 01:29PM
Australian copyright law includes various "fair-dealing" exceptions which recognise that copyrighted material may be copied during normal usage. These are not the same as "fair use" in the US (which is fairly open ended), but are broadly the same idea.

Possible non-infringing copying actions are listed on Wikipedia.

A fact sheet is available on copyright.org.au which explains "Private use" copying: time-, format- & space-shifting (PDF, 258kB).

Many of the new laws are fair (IMHO) and satisfy many of the recent issues I've been thinking about copyright in regards to the need to copy content in order to use it.

Unfortunately the laws have bizarre exclusions for specific formats. For example you cannot ever copy a DVD. Why are DVDs so special? It certainly explains why DVDs are sold today with "digital copies", while no-one feels the need to do this with CDs or books.

They also don't seem to take into account the realities of digital content services like iTunes, or streaming services like YouTube.

More later...