Report to VicRoads: Extent of unlicensed driving - follow up Ref 143 - Alcohol Harms Inquiry

Unlicensed driving is a serious problem in many countries, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. The term "unlicensed driver" is generally used to refer to people who drive or ride a motor vehicle without a valid driver's licence, including those who: • Have let their licence expire, • Have been disqualified or suspended from driving, • Hold an inappropriate licence for the class of vehicle they drive, • Drive outside the restrictions of a special licence, • Don’t currently hold a licence, or • Have never held a licence (Watson, 2003, 2004a)...

Crash involvement patterns of unlicensed drivers and riders in Queensland. Report to Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

Unlicensed driving remains a serious problem for road safety, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. While it does not play a direct causative role in road crashes, unlicensed driving undermines the integrity of the driver licensing system and is associated with a range of high-risk behaviours. This report examines official road crash data from Queensland for the years 2003-08 to compare the crash involvement patterns of unlicensed drivers with those of licensed drivers and explore the scope and nature of unlicensed driving. This study replicates and extends upon two previous studies examining the involvement of unlicensed drivers in crashes in Queensland (Watson, 2004a; 2004b; Watson & Steinhardt, 2006).

A comparison of methods to estimate the extent of unlicensed driving: Literature review. Final report to Queensland Transport

Unlicensed driving is a serious problem in many countries, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. The term ‘unlicensed driver' is generally used to refer to people who operate a motor vehicle or motorcycle without a valid driver's licence, including those who: • have let their licence expire; • have been disqualified or suspended from driving; • hold an inappropriate class of licence for the vehicle they drive; • drive outside the restrictions of a special licence; • don’t currently hold a licence; or • have never held a licence.

An examination of the factors contributing to unlicensed driving. Report to Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

Unlicensed driving is a serious problem in many countries, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. Unlike alcohol impairment and speeding, unlicensed driving does not play a direct causative role in road crashes. However it represents a major problem for road safety in two respects. Firstly, it undermines the effectiveness of driver licensing systems by preventing the allocation of demerit points and reducing the impact of licence loss (Watson, 2004b). Secondly, there is a growing body of evidence linking unlicensed driving to a cluster of high-risk behaviours including drink driving, speeding, failure to wear seat belts and motorcycle use (Griffin & DeLaZerda, 2000; Harrison, 1997; Watson, 1997, 2004b). Consistent with this, utilising the quasi-induced exposure method, Watson (2004a) estimated that in Queensland, unlicensed drivers were almost three times more likely to be involved in a reported crash than licensed drivers.

Profiling unlicensed drivers and riders in Queensland. Report to Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

Unlicensed driving remains a serious problem for road safety, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. This report examines de-identified traffic infringement and sanction histories for drivers in Queensland who had lost their licence between 1st January 2003 and 31st December 2008. A total of 546,117 Queensland drivers were identified. Key areas discussed include the prevalence of unlicensed driving and the extent to which particular offences were detected amongst drivers with a licence sanction or disqualified licence.

Unlicensed and unregistered vehicle project: Summary report. Report to Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

Unlicensed driving remains a serious problem for road safety, despite ongoing improvements in traffic law enforcement practices and technology. While it does not play a direct causative role in road crashes, unlicensed driving undermines the integrity of the driver licensing system and is associated with a range of high-risk behaviours. The Queensland Transport and Main Roads (TMR) commissioned a program of research with separate components relating to different aspects of unlicensed driving. Drawing on Australian and international studies, the Unlicensed and Unregistered Vehicle (UUV) project explores the nature of unlicensed driving in Queensland, consolidates the available research evidence and identifies gaps in current knowledge relating to the driving behaviours of unlicensed drivers.

The dawn of the age of the drones:An Australian privacy law perspective

Suppose a homeowner habitually enjoys sunbathing in his or her backyard, protected by a high fence from prying eyes, including those of an adolescent neighbour. In times past such homeowners could be assured that they might go about their activities without a threat to their privacy. However, recent years have seen technological advances in the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (‘UAVs’), also known colloquially as drones, that have allowed them to become more reduced in size, complexity and price. UAVs today include models retailing to the public for less than $350 and with an ease of operation that enables them to serve as mobile platforms for miniature cameras. These machines now mean that for individuals like the posited homeowner’s adolescent neighbour, barriers such as high fences no longer constitute insuperable obstacles to their voyeuristic endeavours. Moreover, ease of access to the internet and video sharing websites provides a ready means of sharing any recordings made with such cameras with a wide audience. Persons in the homeowner’s position might understandably seek some form of redress for such egregious invasions of their privacy. Other than some kind of self-help, what alternative measures may be available?

Rediscovering law students as citizens: Critical thinking and the public value of legal education

In a series of publications over the last decade, Australian National University Professor Margaret Thornton has documented a disturbing change in the nature of legal education. This body of work culminates in a recently published book based on interviews with 145 legal academics in Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada. In it, Thornton describes a feeling of widespread unease among legal academics that society, government, university administrators and students themselves are moving away from viewing legal education as a public good which benefits both students and society. Instead, legal education is increasingly being viewed as a purely private good, for consumption by the student in the quest for individual career enhancement.

A values analysis of attitudes towards the use of law to prevent obesity: How might these values inform public health law theory and practice?

This thesis asks whether values, like government duty, individual responsibility, community and social justice, influence the way that scholars and research participants think about the use of law to prevent obesity. It explores the way participants speak about values when expressing their support for or against a variety of government regulatory interventions, including taxation, food labelling reforms and advertising restrictions. This research contributes to our understanding of theories of public health law and public health ethics. The qualitative findings also have implications for policy development, in advocating for a variety of government interventions to prevent obesity.

International regulation of large-scale land acquisition involving foreign entities

Outlines some of the potential risks or actual harms that result from large-scale land leases or acquisitions and the relevant human rights and environmental law principles.

The role of regulatory frameworks and non-state actors in creating sustainable diets

This presentation discussed the growing recognition of sustainable diets at international governance levels and how this reflects the challenges and win-win opportunities of living within our ecological limits. I assert that sustainable diets provide an example of how living within our ecological limits would actually make us better off even apart from environmental benefits. After determining whether Australians’ generally have a sustainable diet, I outlined how Australian regulators are attempting to address sustainable diets. I argued that the personal responsibility approach coupled with the focus on preventing or reducing overweight and obesity levels are proving incapable of bringing about long-term sustainable diets that will contribute to the health and well-being of Australian people.

Who owns Superman? The Man of Steel fights trademark law

Who is Superman’s greatest threat? Evil genius Lex Luthor? General Zod from the Phantom Zone? The doppelganger Bizarro? Super-villain Brainiac? Kryptonite? Or is it intellectual property law?

The high price of drug patents: Australia, patent law, pharmaceutical drugs and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

This week, the secrecy surrounding an independent Australian report on patent law and pharmaceutical drugs has been lifted, and the work has been published to great acclaim...

The empire of cancer: Gene patents and cancer voices

In his book, The Emperor of All Maladies, Siddhartha Mukherjee writes a history of cancer — "It is a chronicle of an ancient disease — once a clandestine, 'whispered-about' illness — that has metamorphosed into a lethal shape-shifting entity imbued with such penetrating metaphorical, medical, scientific, and political potency that cancer is often described as the defining plague of our generation." Increasingly, an important theme in the history of cancer is the role of law, particularly in the field of intellectual property law. It is striking that a number of contemporary policy debates over intellectual property and public health have concerned cancer research, diagnosis, and treatment. In the area of access to essential medicines, there has been much debate over Novartis’ patent application in respect of Glivec, a treatment for leukaemia. India’s Supreme Court held that the Swiss company’s patent application violated a safeguard provision in India’s patent law designed to stop evergreening. In the field of tobacco control, the Australian Government introduced plain packaging for tobacco products in order to address the health burdens associated with the tobacco epidemic. This regime was successfully defended in the High Court of Australia. In the area of intellectual property and biotechnology, there have been significant disputes over the Utah biotechnology company Myriad Genetics and its patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are related to breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision on the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patent in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 in February 2013. The Supreme Court of the United States heard a challenge to the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patents in this area in April 2013, and handed down a judgment in July 2013. Such disputes have involved tensions between intellectual property rights, and public health. This article focuses upon one of these important test cases involving intellectual property, public health, and cancer research. In June 2010, Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy brought an action in the Federal Court of Australia against the validity of a BRCA1 patent — held by Myriad Genetics Inc, the Centre de Recherche du Chul, the Cancer Institute of Japan and Genetic Technologies Limited. Yvonne D’Arcy — a Brisbane woman who has had treatment for breast cancer — maintained: "I believe that what they are doing is morally and ethically corrupt and that big companies should not control any parts of the human body." She observed: "For my daughter, I've had her have [sic] mammograms, etc, because of me but I would still like her to be able to have the test to see if the mutation gene is in there from me." The applicants made the following arguments: "Genes and the information represented by human gene sequences are products of nature universally present in each individual, and the information content of a human gene sequence is fixed. Genetic variations or mutations are products of nature. The isolation of the BRCA1 gene mutation from the human body constitutes no more than a medical or scientific discovery of a naturally occurring phenomenon and does not give rise to a patentable invention." The applicants also argued that "the alleged invention is not a patentable invention in that, so far as claimed in claims 1–3, it is not a manner of manufacture within the meaning of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies". The applicants suggested that "the alleged invention is a mere discovery". Moreover, the applicants contended that "the alleged invention of each of claims 1-3 is not a patentable invention because they are claims for biological processes for the generation of human beings". The applicants, though, later dropped the argument that the patent claims related to biological processes for the generation of human beings. In February 2013, Nicholas J of the Federal Court of Australia considered the case brought by Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy against Myriad Genetics. The judge presented the issues in the case, as follows: "The issue that arises in this case is of considerable importance. It relates to the patentability of genes, or gene sequences, and the practice of 'gene patenting'. Briefly stated, the issue to be decided is whether under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) a valid patent may be granted for a claim that covers naturally occurring nucleic acid — either deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) — that has been 'isolated'". In this context, the word "isolated" implies that naturally occurring nucleic acid found in the cells of the human body, whether it be DNA or RNA, has been removed from the cellular environment in which it naturally exists and separated from other cellular components also found there. The genes found in the human body are made of nucleic acid. The particular gene with which the patent in suit is concerned (BRCA1) is a human breast and ovarian cancer disposing gene. Various mutations that may be present in this gene have been linked to various forms of cancer including breast cancer and ovarian cancer.' The judge held in this particular case that Myriad Genetics’ patent claims were a "manner of manufacture" under s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies and s 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). The matter is currently under appeal in the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. This article interprets the dispute over Myriad Genetics in light of the scholarly work of Nobel Laureate Professor Joseph Stiglitz on inequality. Such work has significant explanatory power in the context of intellectual property and biotechnology. First, Stiglitz has contended that "societal inequality was a result not just of the laws of economics, but also of how we shape the economy — through politics, including through almost every aspect of our legal system". Stiglitz is concerned that "our intellectual property regime … contributes needlessly to the gravest form of inequality." He maintains: "The right to life should not be contingent on the ability to pay." Second, Stiglitz worries that "some of the most iniquitous aspects of inequality creation within our economic system are a result of 'rent-seeking': profits, and inequality, generated by manipulating social or political conditions to get a larger share of the economic pie, rather than increasing the size of that pie". He observes that "the most iniquitous aspect of this wealth appropriation arises when the wealth that goes to the top comes at the expense of the bottom." Third, Stiglitz comments: "When the legal regime governing intellectual property rights is designed poorly, it facilitates rent-seeking" and "the result is that there is actually less innovation and more inequality." He is concerned that intellectual property regimes "create monopoly rents that impede access to health both create inequality and hamper growth more generally." Finally, Stiglitz has recommended: "Government-financed research, foundations, and the prize system … are alternatives, with major advantages, and without the inequality-increasing disadvantages of the current intellectual property rights system.’" This article provides a critical analysis of the Australian litigation and debate surrounding Myriad Genetics’ patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1. First, it considers the ruling of Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia that Myriad Genetics’ patent was a manner of manufacture as it related to an artificially created state of affairs, and not mere products of nature. Second, it examines the policy debate over gene patents in Australia, and its relevance to the litigation involving Myriad Genetics. Third, it examines comparative law, and contrasts the ruling by Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia with developments in the United States, Canada, and the European Union. Fourth, this piece considers the reaction to the decision of Nicholas at first instance in Australia. Fifth, the article assesses the prospects of an appeal to the Full Federal Court of Australia over the Myriad Genetics’ patents. Finally, this article observes that, whatever happens in respect of litigation against Myriad Genetics, there remains controversy over Genetic Technologies Limited. The Melbourne firm has been aggressively licensing and enforcing its related patents on non-coding DNA and genomic mapping.

A creature of statute: Copyright law and legal formalism

This article argues that copyright law is not just a creature of statute, but it is also a social and imaginative contruct. It evaluates a number of critiques of legal formalism. Part 1 examines whether the positive rules and principles of copyright law are the product of historical contingency and political expediency. Part 2 considers the social operation of copyright law in terms of its material effects and cultural significance. Part 3 investigates the future of copyright law, in light of the politics of globalisation and the impact of new information technologies.