SettleMEN-2: Displaced twice? Impact of the Queensland floods on men from refugee backgrounds living in Brisbane and Toowoomba. Broadsheet No. 1: Exposure to and impact of the floods

Between 2008 and 2010, the SettleMEN study followed a group of 233 recently arrived men from refugee backgrounds living in urban and regional Southeast Queensland with the aim of documenting their health and settlement experiences. The study found that overall, these men bring important resources that may help them to cope better with the challenges of settlement: good levels of subjective health status, mental health and wellbeing; good family and social support; and good levels of engagement in tertiary/trade education in Australia. Over time, however, their levels of wellbeing decreased as they experienced barriers to social participation and inclusion within their host community, including: unemployment and difficulties securing good jobs (even for those with tertiary/trade qualifications obtained in Australia), financial stress, difficulties accessing housing, limited interactions with neighbours, and experiences of racism and discrimination. Importantly, although men living in the Toowoomba acknowledged some of the benefits of regional settlement, they faced greater barriers to participation in the labour market, reported lower job satisfaction, and were more likely to experience social exclusion overall. In 2012 method approach and a peer interviewer model, we were able to conduct a follow 141 (61%) of the original 233 SettleMEN participants to document the impact of the January 2011 Queensland floods on their health and settlement. This broadsheet focuses on participants’ degree of exposure to and impact of the floods, their perceptions of safety and security, and their vulnerability and adaptive capacity to extreme weather events.

Amazing tale of teen's survival in torrent gives hope to families of the missing

Flailing in a maelstrom of muddy water, a teenager being swept along Toowoomba's shopping strip has become a reason for hope for the loved ones of the 12 people still missing in the devastating Queensland floods...

The valley of the dolls: Brand protection and artistic parody

In the case of Mattel Inc v Walking Mountain Productions, the toy doll manufacturer Mattel sought to prohibit a Utah photographer called Thomas Forsythe from producing and selling a series of 78 photographs entitled "Food Chain Barbie". The work had strong social and political overtones. The artist said that he chose to parody Barbie in his photographs because he wanted to challenge the beauty myth and the objectification of women. He observed: "Barbie is the most enduring of those products that feed on the insecurities of our beauty and perfection-obsessed consumer culture." The company Mattel argued that the photographs infringed its copyrights, trade marks, and trade dress. It was concerned that the artistic works would erode the brand of Barbie by wrongfully sexualising its blonde paragon of womanhood. However, Lew J of the Central District Court of California granted summary judgment for the photographer. The Court of Appeals upheld this verdict. Pregerson J held that the use of the manufacturer's copyrighted doll in parodic photographs constituted a fair use of copyright works. His Honour held that the use of manufacturer's "Barbie" mark and trade dress did not amount to trade mark infringement or dilution. This article provides a case commentary upon the Court of Appeals decision in Mattel Inc v Walking Mountain Productions, and its wider ramifications for the treatment of artistic parody under copyright law and trade mark law. It contends that the decision highlights the need for reform in Australian jurisprudence and legislation in respect of artistic parody.