IP in Asia

This presentation will start with a brief review of the first phase of this project, which focused largely on the impact on innovation of legal and institutional IP reforms in Asia triggered by the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and by subsequent bilateral or multilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The presentation will then show the emerging issues relevant for the second phase of the project, which in an increasingly diversified IP landscape will lie at the intersection of IP with other disciplines and other areas of law, such as competition law, media law, criminal law, human rights, environmental law and constitutional law.

The novel as social satire: 60 years later, the wind done gone and the limitations of fair use

The absence of the doctrine of fair use from Australian copyright law has been a bone of contention in Australia after the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA). As the Australian government reformed the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) in the aftermath of the FTA it eschewed the option of adopting fair use. Instead, Australia chose to incorporate a version of fair use into its existing fair dealing framework. Accordingly, the Copyright Amendment Act 2006 (Cth) inserted ss 41A and 103AA into the Copyright Act. These provisions provide that a fair dealing with a copyright protected work does not constitute an infringement if it is done for the purposes of parody or satire. These provisions codify part of the ratio of the United States Supreme Court in the seminal case of Campbell v Acuff Rose Music. However, the parameters of these new provisions are unexplored and the sparse nature of fair dealing jurisprudence means that the true meaning of the provisions is unclear. Moreover, two cases from the United States, SunTrust Bank v Houghton Mifflin and Salinger v Colting, underline just how important it is to have legal rules that protect literary ‘re-writes’. Both cases involved authors using an original novel to ‘write back’ to the original author and the broader culture. ‘Writing back’ or the ‘re-write’ has a firm basis in literature. It adds something invaluable to our culture. The key question is whether our legal landscape can allow it to flourish. This paper examines the interaction between fair use and literary re-writes.

Homicide, self-defence and the (inchoate) criminology of battered women

Law reform is increasingly underpinned by empirical research. This is clearly evident in contemporary reform of the laws of self-defence and homicide. These reforms have been motivated largely by concern for battered women who kill their abusive partners. An extensive body of empirical criminological research has been utilised to identify bias in the operation of the traditional law of homicide and self-defence and has been relied upon by many law reform bodies. This article identifies and evaluates the "implicit criminology" constituted by these empirical studies. Five matters that have formed the backdrop to contemporary reform are investigated: the origins of the law of murder; the operation of the law of self-defence; the historical utilisation of mental state defences by battered women; the circumstances in which battered women kill their abusers; and the trial as a key location for processing these offenders. It is argued that the implicit criminology that has driven reform of the law of homicide and self-defence is largely undeveloped or unsubstantiated. Despite the centrality of concern for battered defendants in much contemporary discussion in criminology and the criminal law, it appears that there is still substantial research to be done to clarify the circumstances in which victims of chronic violence kill their abusive partners, how these defendants experience the law and the availability of self-defence to them. What seems to have been established may be more complex, contingent and inchoate than previously acknowledged.

Surveillance, Governance and Professional Sport

The surveillance capacities of professional sports clubs and Leagues are directly related to their modes of governance. This paper identifies how private sports clubs enact surveillance through processes of inclusion and exclusion. Using three examples to demonstrate these processes, we argue that the surveillance mechanisms associated with sports governance at times replicate, at other times contradict, and at other times influence those associated with broader law enforcement and security developments. These examples also suggest potential increases in surveillance activities that emerge in club governance often flow from external concerns regarding allegations of crime, national security breaches and corruption. These context-specific case studies (Flyvbjerg 2001) demonstrate how surveillance and identity authentication are closely tied to the complex, multi-tiered governance structures and practices in three distinct sports. We then explore how these patterns can be interpreted as either connected to or distinct from equivalent developments involving the surveillance surge (Murakami Wood 2009) and concepts of inclusion and exclusion under the criminal law. We conclude by discussing how both internal and external regulatory forces can shape interrelated facets of surveillance, governance and exclusion in elite sports.

R v Middendorp

This book brings together feminist academics, lawyers and activists to present an impressive collection of alternative judgments in a series of Australian legal cases.

The High Court on crime in 2014: Outcomes and jurisprudence

This article examines the Australian High Court decisions in 2014 which relate to criminal matters. This systematic analysis of all High Court judgments commenced in this Journal in 2010 and is now undertaken annually. The article explains the principles that derive from these cases and identifies jurisprudential themes from the decisions. It also sets outthe significance of the cases and the possible wider consequences of the decisions.

Proportionality in sentencing: the need to factor in community experience, not public opinion

This is the first book to address the question of what role public opinion should play in the way criminal offenders are punished.Should public opinion determine—or even influence—sentencing policy and practice? Should the punishment of criminal offenders reflect what the public regards as appropriate? These deceptively simple questions conceal complex theoretical and methodological challenges to the administration of punishment.In the West, politicians have often answered these questions in the affirmative; penal reforms have been justified with direct reference to the attitudes of the public. This is why the contention that politicians should bridge the gap between the public and criminal justice practice has widespread resonance. Criminal law scholars, for their part, have often been more reluctant to accept public input in penal practice, and some have even held that the idea of consulting public opinion constitutes a populist approach to punishment.The purpose of this book is to examine the moral significance of public opinion for penal theory and practice. For the first time in a single volume the editors, Jesper Ryberg and Julian V. Roberts, have assembled a number of respected criminologists, philosphers, and legal theorists to address the various aspects of why and how public opinion should be reflected in the way the criminal justice system deals with criminals. The chapters address the myriad complexities surrounding this issue by first weighing the justifications for incorporating public views into punishment practices and then considering the various ways this might be achieved through juries, prosecutors, restoratifve justice programs, and other means.

Rethinking the employer's summary dismissal power in the employment contract

 The principal subject of this thesis is the employer’s summary dismissal power under Australian contract law. Summary dismissal is by far the most brutal way that an employment relationship may end. Its suddenness can have long-lasting economic and psychological impacts upon the dismissed employee. However, the area has been neglected in legal scholarship. The result of this is that issues arising from the jurisprudence have not been the subject of critique and scrutiny, until now. This thesis addresses this gap in the scholarship. The thesis also proposes a new approach to resolving these disputes based on the proportionality concept. An employer's decision to dismiss its employees in this way should be commensurate to the detriment caused by the employee's actions. Therefore, one 'should not use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.'

Is a 24 hour ban such a bad thing?

A key element in Australian policing in recent years is the growth of police-imposed discretionary summary justice. The rise and impact of on-the-spot fines, infringement notices, exclusion orders and move-on powers enable police-initiated resolutions and punishments to be imposed, often without legal or judicial intervention. These operational policing mechanisms reflect underlying pressures to reduce costs, ease the burden on the court system, and speed up the decision-making process, but when viewed from a human rights perspective the potential consequences are significant. Focusing on the legislative development of banning notices in Victoria, this article highlights the impact of such a police-imposed punishment upon individual due process procedural protections. Banning notices deny the recipient the right to conduct a defence, undermine the presumption of innocence, and conflate notions of pre-emption and punishment. The rhetoric upon which the banning notice legislation is predicated obviates meaningful scrutiny of the diminution of individual rights that are implicit in its enactment. A perceived ‘need’ to control disorder and ‘re-balance’ justice to prioritise community protection is used to legitimise any consequential impact upon the principles of criminal law, due process and human rights.

Sex, culpability, and the defence of provocation

The partial defence of provocation is one of the most controversial doctrines within the criminal law. It has now been abolished in a number of international jurisdictions. Addressing the trajectory of debates about reform of the provocation defence across different jurisdictions, Sex, Culpability and the Defence of Provocation considers the construction and representation of subjectivity and sexual difference in legal narrations of intimate partner homicide. Undeniably, the most vexing exculpatory cultural narrative of our times is that of a woman 'asking for it'. This book explores how the process of judgment in a criminal trial involves not only the drawing of inferences from the facts of a particular case, but also operates to deliver a narrative. Law, it is argued, constructs a narrative of how the female body incites male violence. And, pursuing an approach that is informed by socio-legal studies, literary theory and feminist theories of the body, Sex, Culpability and the Defence of Provocation considers how this narrative is constructed via a range of discursive practices that position woman as a threat to masculine norms of propriety and autonomy. Once we have a clear understanding of the significance of narrative in legal decision-making, we can then formulate textual strategies of resistance to the violence of law's victim-blaming narratives by rewriting them.