A Submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee on the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 (Cth)

The film company, Roadshow, the pay television company Foxtel, and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp and News Limited — as well as copyright industries — have been clamouring for new copyright powers and remedies. In the summer break, the Coalition Government has responded to such entreaties from its industry supporters and donors, with a new package of copyright laws and policies. There has been significant debate over the proposals between the odd couple of Attorney-General George Brandis and the Minister for Communications, Malcolm Turnbull. There has been deep, philosophical differences between the two Ministers over the copyright agenda. The Attorney-General George Brandis has supported a model of copyright maximalism, with strong rights and remedies for the copyright empires in film, television, and publishing. He has shown little empathy for the information technology companies of the digital economy. The Attorney-General has been impatient to press ahead with a copyright regime. The Minister for Communications, Malcolm Turnbull, has been somewhat more circumspect,recognising that there is a need to ensure that copyright laws do not adversely impact upon competition in the digital economy. The final proposal is a somewhat awkward compromise between the discipline-and-punish regime preferred by Brandis, and the responsive regulation model favoured by Turnbull. In his new book, Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free: Laws for the Internet Age, Cory Doctorow has some sage advice for copyright owners: Things that don’t make money: * Complaining about piracy. * Calling your customers thieves. * Treating your customers like thieves. In this context, the push by copyright owners and the Coalition Government to have a copyright crackdown may well be counter-productive to their interests. This submission considers a number of key elements of the Coalition Government’s Copyright Crackdown. Part 1 examines the proposals in respect of the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 (Cth). Part 2 focuses upon the proposed Copyright Code. Part 3 considers the question of safe harbours for intermediaries. Part 4 examines the question of copyright exceptions – particularly looking at the proposal of the Australian Law Reform Commission for the introduction of a defence of fair use. Part 5 highlights the recommendations of the IT Pricing Inquiry and the Harper Competition Policy Review in respect of copyright law, consumer rights, and competition law.

A methodology for extracting legal norms from regulatory documents

We present a methodology to extract legal norms from regulatory documents for their formalisation and later compliance checking. The need for the methodology is motivated from the shortcomings of existing approaches where the rule type and process aspects relevant to the rules are largely overlook. The methodology incorporates the well–known IF. . . THEN structure extended with the process aspect and rule type, and guides how to properly extract the conditions and logical structure of the legal rules for reasoning and modelling of obligations for compliance checking.

Protective legal regulation for home-based workers in Australian textile, clothing and footwear supply chains

Supply chain outsourcing has posed problems for conventional labour regulation, which focuses on employers contracting directly with workers, particularly employees. These difficulties have been exacerbated by the traditional trifurcated approach to regulation of pay and conditions, work health and safety and workers’ compensation. This paper analyses the parallel interaction of two legal developments within the Australian textile, clothing and footwear industry. The first is mandatory contractual tracking mechanisms within state and federal labour laws and the second is the duties imposed by the harmonised Work Health and Safety Acts. Their combined effect has created an innovative, fully enforceable and integrated regulatory framework for the textile, clothing and footwear industry and, it is argued, other supply chains in different industry contexts. This paper highlights how regulatory solutions can address adverse issues for workers at the bottom of contractual networks, such as fissured workplaces and capital fragmentation, by enabling regulators to harness the commercial power of business controllers at the apex to ensure compliance throughout the entire chain.

Don't argue with the ref! - Legal liability for incorrect decisions of sports' officials

This paper continues the conversation from recent articles examining potential remedies available for incorrect decisions by sports officials. In particular, this article focuses on bringing an action against an official in negligence for pure economic loss. Using precedent cases, it determines that such an action would have a low chance of success, as a duty of care would be difficult to establish. Even if that could be overcome, an aggrieved player or team would still face further hurdles at the stages of breach, causation and defences. The article concludes by proposing some options to further reduce the small risk of liability to officials.

An agreement to negotiate a contract in good faith: No legal content and too uncertain for enforcement

The decision of Baldwin v Icon Energy Ltd [2015] QSC 12 is generally instructive upon the issue of the minimum required to enforce an agreement to negotiate .The language of these agreements is always couched in terms which include the expressions “good faith” and “reasonable endeavours” as descriptive of the yardstick of behaviour of each party in the intended negotiation to follow such an agreement. However, the mere statement of these intended characteristics of negotiation may not be sufficient to ensure that the agreement to negotiate is enforceable.

Who Rules Japan? Popular Participation in the Japanese Legal Process

"The dramatic growth of the Japanese economy in the postwar period, and its meltdown in the 1990s, has attracted sustained interest in the power dynamics underlying the management of Japan’s administrative state. Scholars and commentators have long debated over who wields power in Japan, asking the fundamental question: who really governs Japan? This important volume revisits this question by turning its attention to the regulation and design of the Japanese legal system. With essays covering the new lay-judge system in Japanese criminal trials, labour dispute resolution panels, prison policy, gendered justice, government lawyers, welfare administration and administrative transparency, this comprehensive book explores the players and processes in Japan’s administration of justice."--publisher website

Welcome to the law/lore School

Law is saturate with stories. People tell their stories to lawyers; lawyers tell their clients' stories to courts; politicians develop policies to respond to their constituents' stories of injustice or inequality. These stories then translate into sources of law. Cases resolve contested stories between parties. Statutes target larger stories of social, economical and political significance. The legal system, in short, is a synthesis of statutory and judicial solutions to stories.

Let’s talk about lex: Narrative analysis as both research method and teaching technique in law

Law is narration: it is narrative, narrator and the narrated. As a narrative, the law is constituted by a constellation of texts – from official sources such as statutes, treaties and cases, to private arrangements such as commercial contracts, deeds and parenting plans. All are a collection of stories: cases are narrative contests of facts and rights; statutes are recitations of the substantive and procedural bases for social, economic and political interactions; private agreements are plots for future relationships, whether personal or professional. As a narrator, law speaks in the language of modern liberalism. It describes its world in abstractions rather than in concrete experience, universal principles rather than individual subjectivity. It casts people into ‘parties’ to legal relationships; structures human interactions into ‘issues’ or ‘problems’; and tells individual stories within larger narrative arcs such as ‘the rule of law’ and ‘the interests of justice’. As the narrated, the law is a character in its own story. The scholarship of law, for example, is a type of story-telling with law as its central character. For positivists, still the dominant group in the legal genre, law is a closed system of formal rules with an “immanent rationality” and its own “structure, substantive content, procedure and tradition,” dedicated to finality of judgment. For scholars inspired by the interpretative tradition in the humanities, law is a more ambivalent character, susceptible to influences from outside its realm and masking a hidden ideological agenda under its cloak of universality and neutrality. For social scientists, law is a protagonist on a wider social stage, impacting on society, the economy and the polity is often surprising ways.

Law as lore

Law is saturated with stories. People tell their stories to lawyers; lawyers tell their clients’ stories to courts; legislators develop regulation to respond to their constituents’ stories of injustice or inequality. In legal education, professors devise hypothetical scenarios to test student understanding of legal doctrine; in law examinations and assignments, students construct advice to fictional clients. The common law legal system derives many of its foundational principles from case law — in effect, stories with legal solutions — that have accumulated over time. The civil law system, despite a different design centred on legal codes, also relies on judicial story-telling to interpret the code provisions and flesh out the gaps.

Pioneering use of narrative method in a first-year law course to provide an authentic, inquiry-based entry into the discipline of law

Law is saturated with stories. People tell their stories to lawyers; lawyers tell their client's stories to courts; and legislators develop regulation to respond to their constituent's stories of injustice or inequality. My approach to first-year legal education respects this narrative tradition. Both my curriculum design and assessment scheme in the compulsory first-year subject Australian Legal System deploy narrative methodology as the central teaching and learning device. Throughout the course, students work on resolving the problems of four hypothetical clients. Like a murder mystery, pieces of the puzzle come together as students learn more about legal institutions and the texts they produce, the process of legal research, the analysis and interpretation of primary legal sources, the steps in legal problem-solving, the genre conventions of legal writing style, the practical skills and ethical dimensions of professional practice, and critical inquiry into the normative underpinnings and impacts of the law. The assessment scheme mirrors this design. In their portfolio-based assignment, for example, students devise their own client profile, research the client's legal position and prepare a memorandum of advice.

Legal translation

Legal translation theory brooks little interference with the source legal text. With few exceptions (Joseph 2005; Hammel 2008; Harvey 2002; Kahaner 2005; Kasirer 2001; Lawson 2006), lawyers and linguists tend to tether themselves to the pole of literalism. More a tight elastic band than an unyielding rope, this tether constrains — rather than prohibits — liberal legal translations. It can stretch to accommodate a degree of freedom by the legal translator however, should it go too far, it snaps back to the default position of linguistic fidelity. This ‘stretch and snap’ gives legal translation a unique place in general translation theory. In the general debate over the ‘degree of freedom’ the translator enjoys in conveying the meaning of the text, legal translation theory has reached its own settlement. Passivity is the default; creativity, the ‘qualified’ exception (Hammel 2008: 275).

A legal perspective of carbon rights and benefit sharing under REDD+: A conceptual framework and examples from Cambodia and Kenya

This article discusses two key issues in REDD+ design and implementation at the national level – carbon rights, and benefit sharing. Both carbon rights and benefit sharing can be understood as new legal concepts (although they build on existing law), and as legal concepts they offer a framework for addressing related areas of REDD+ policy. Many countries are currently considering how to manage carbon rights and benefit sharing issues, including Cambodia and Kenya. Both of these countries host existing forest carbon projects and are also in the process of designing national REDD+ programmes. This article uses a conceptual framework for carbon rights and benefit sharing derived from legal analysis to consider the cases of both Cambodia and Kenya, and also includes a general discussion of the challenges countries might encounter when considering how to manage carbon rights and benefit sharing in the context of REDD+ implementation.

Editorial for Journal of Learning Design, 6(3) - "Special issue: Legal education and curriculum renewal"

Welcome to this special edition of the Journal of Learning Design which focuses on legal education and curriculum renewal in law. At the outset ,we would like to thank the editors of the Journal, Margaret Lloyd and Nan Bahr for agreeing to host this special edition. The special edition is timely as legal education in Australia is enjoying a lively period of renewal.

Amplified stories: Digital technology and representations of lived experiences

New media technologies and the narrative turn in qualitative research has expanded the methods through which we gather data about and share findings of groups who have traditionally been written about by others rather than telling their own stories to reveal the complexities of their experiences. This chapter explores two projects that use storytelling and technology in an effort to change public perceptions about disadvantaged a community or cohort that have specific circumstances but are a result of policies beyond their control.