Google book search settlement : implications for Australia

In 2005, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) and the Authors Guild (AG) sued Google for ‘massive copyright infringement’ for the mass digitization of books for the Google Book Search Project. In 2008, the parties reached a settlement, pending court approval. If approved, the settlement could have far-reaching consequences for authors, libraries, educational institutions and the reading public. In this article, I provide an overview of the Google Book Search Settlement. Firstly, I explain the Google Book Search Project, the legal questions raised by the Project and the lawsuit brought against Google. Secondly, I examine the terms of the Settlement Agreement, including what rights were granted between the parties and what rights were granted to the general public. Finally, I consider the implications of the settlement for Australia. The Settlement Agreement, and consequently the broader scope of the Google Book Search Project, is currently limited to the United States. In this article I consider whether the Project could be extended to Australia at a later date, how Google might go about doing this, and the implications of such an extension under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). I argue that without prior agreements with rightholders, our limited exceptions to copyright infringement mean that Google is unlikely to be able to extend the full scope of the Project to Australia without infringing copyright.

Between formal and informal : the shakeout in China’s online video industry

While a rich body of literature in television and film studies and media policy studies has tended to focus on the media activities in the formal sector, we know much less about informal media activities, its influence on state policies, as well as the dynamics between the formal and the informal sectors. This article examines these issues with reference to a particularly revealing period following a large-scale government crackdown on peer-to-peer video sharing sites in China in 2008. By analyzing the aim and consequences of the state action, I point to the counter-productive effect in terms of cultural loss and the resurgence of offline piracy; and show the positive impact on forcing the informal into the formal sector, and pressuring the formal to innovate. Meanwhile, an increasing rapprochement between professional and user-created content leads to a new relationship between formal and informal sectors. This case demonstrates the importance of considering the dynamics between the two sectors. It also offers compelling evidence of the role of the informal sector in engendering state action, which in turn impacted on the co-evolution of the formal and the informal sectors.

The responsibilities of intermediaries

This paper addresses the liability of intermediaries for copyright infringement, defamation and for engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct. It explores the issue of whether it is possible to develop a legitimate, decentralised copyright graduated response scheme in Australia.

Hail to the thief: A tribute to Kazaa

This paper considers the ongoing litigation against the peer to peer network Kazaa. Record companies and Hollywood studios have faced jurisdictional and legal problems in suing this network for copyright infringement. As Wired Magazine observes: ’The servers are in Denmark. The software is in Estonia. The domain is registered Down Under, the corporation on a tiny island in the South Pacific. The users - 60 million of them - are everywhere around the world.' In frustration, copyright owners have launched copyright actions against intermediaries - like Internet Service Providers such as Verizon. They have also embarked on filing suits of individual users of file-sharing programs. In addition, copyright owners have called for domestic and international law reform in respect of digital copyright. The Senate Committee on Government Affairs in the United States Congress has reviewed the controversial use of subpoenas in suits against users of file-sharing peer to peer networks. The United States has encouraged other countries to adopt provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998 (US) in bilateral and regional free trade agreements.

What now after the Dallas Buyers Club pirate claim is rejected as ‘surreal’?

The makers of Dallas Buyers Club have been dealt a blow in their attempt to extract payment from people alleged to have downloaded illegal copies of the movie. Voltage Pictures, which owns Dallas Buyers Club, has been trying to identify over 4,700 iiNet subscribers who it alleges downloaded illicit copies of the movie. Earlier this year, the Federal Court agreed that iiNet should hand over subscriber details, but warned that any letter sent to account holders must first be approved by the court to protect consumers from abuse of the legal system. In a win for consumer protection, the Federal Court has now rejected Voltage’s draft letters, criticising Voltage’s attempts to avoid explaining what fee it would demand.

American lessons: Implementing fair use in Australia

This article discusses the recent Australian Law Reform Commission report proposing a fair use defense to copyright infringement in Australia. It examines the experience of fair use cases in the United States and draws three lessons from the jurisprudential history. First, it suggests that decisions in fair use can only really be understood within a theoretical framework, and that unless we import that framework into Australia any fair use defense will not work as expected. Secondly, the article argues that the area where fair use jurisprudence appears to be most helpful, in dealing with “transformative” works, is actually much more limited than outsiders to the US would expect. And finally, it suggests that any implementation of a factor related to market substitution should take account of the gaming of the system that has gone on in the US.

Australian Media Law [5th Edition]

Australian Media Law details and explains the complex case law, legislation and regulations governing media practice in areas as diverse as journalism, advertising, multimedia and broadcasting. It examines the issues affecting traditional forms of media such as television, radio, film and newspapers as well as for recent forms such as the internet, online forums and digital technology, in a clear and accessible format. New additions to the fifth edition include: - the implications of new anti-terrorism legislation for journalists; - developments in privacy law, including Law Reform recommendations for a statutory cause of action to protect personal privacy in Australia and the expanding privacy jurisprudence in the United Kingdom and New Zealand; - liability for defamation of internet search engines and service providers; - the High Court decision in Roadshow v iiNet and the position of internet service providers in relation to copyright infringement via their services; - new suppression order regimes; - statutory reforms providing journalists with a rebuttable presumption of non-disclosure when called upon to reveal their sources in a court of law; - recent developments regarding whether journalists can use electronic devices to collect and disseminate information about court proceedings; - contempt committed by jurors via social media; and an examination of recent decisions on defamation, confidentiality, vilification, copyright and contempt.

Colour image of the thorax and abdomen

This is an image taken from Anatomy tv, an interactive resource for teaching and learning in anatomy and physiology which the University Library subscribes to. This image may not be changed, but you may take a copy and present it with other materials and resources you are using so long as they are password protected for access by members of the University only. "All products and all images within the products are protected by copyright. The products and images can only be used for private educational purposes, unless a specific license is purchased for any other usage. For any commercial usage of the images, please contact Primal Pictures Limited. The products allow members of the University of Southampton to ‘copy and paste’ all of the text as well as the images in the 3D-model window and all of the slides. These can then be pasted into nearly any other word-processing or graphics program, including Powerpoint. These resources can be made available to members of the University of Southampton via a password-protected service. This again is designed solely as a service for private educational uses. Like any publisher, Primal Pictures protects itself against copyright infringement. Please do contact Debra Morris in the University Library before using these resources to ensure that conditions are respected. ©Primal Pictures Limited 2007

Human heart

A colour image of the human heart. This is an image taken from Anatomy tv, an interactive resource for teaching and learning in anatomy and physiology which the University Library subscribes to. This image may not be changed, but you may take a copy and present it with other materials and resources you are using so long as they are password protected for access by members of the University only. All products and all images within the products are protected by copyright. The products and images can only be used for private educational purposes, unless a specific license is purchased for any other usage. For any commercial usage of the images, please contact Primal Pictures Limited. The products allow members of the University of Southampton to ‘copy and paste’ all of the text as well as the images in the 3D-model window and all of the slides. These can then be pasted into nearly any other word-processing or graphics program, including Powerpoint. These resources can be made available to members of the University of Southampton via a password-protected service. This again is designed solely as a service for private educational uses. Like any publisher, Primal Pictures protects itself against copyright infringement. Please do contact Debra Morris in the University Library before using these resources to ensure that conditions are respected. ©Primal Pictures Limited 2007

Cybercrime - An Interactive Presentation

Presentation slides + mini quiz on the topic of cybercrime.

Google Images German Federal Court Entscheidung vom 29.04.2010, I ZR 69/08 With an English Introduction

The long-awaited verdict by the German Federal Court of Justice towards Google image search has drawn much attention to the problem of copyright infringement by search engines on the Internet. In the past years the question has arose whether the listing itself in a search engine like Google can be an infringement of copyright. The decision is widely seen as one of the most important of the last years. With significant amount of effort, the German Fede- ral Court tried to balance the interests of the right holders and those of the digital reality.

Google face à la justice française et belge Nouvelles décisions en matière de droit d’auteur

Internet Service Providers’ liability for copyright infringement is a debated issue in France and Belgium, particularly with respect to intermediaries such as providers of hyperlinks and location tool services for which the e-commerce directive does not set explicitly any exemption from liability. Thus, the question arises among other things whether the safe harbour provisions provided for in respect of caching and hosting also could apply to search engines. French and Belgian Courts had recently to decide on this issue in several cases concerning Google’s complementary tools such as Google Videos, Google Images, Google Suggest and Google News. This article seeks to give a summary of and to assess this recent case law.

The Digital Economy Act in the dock: a proportionate ruling

The UK’s Digital Economy Act 2010 contains measures to enforce copyright on the Internet, specifically a two-tiered form of a graduated response.The Act was challenged in the High Court by two of the UK’s biggest Internet Service Providers (ISP), who obtained a Judicial Review of the copyright enforce- ment provisions. This paper is an overview of the case, based on the hearing of March 2011 and the ensuing judgement. It focuses on the two most hotly contested grounds for the challenge, namely an al- leged failure to notify the European Commission under the Technical Standards Directive, and the pro- portionality or otherwise of the contested provisions. It observes how the judgement accepted the defence argumentation of the government and the copyright owners as interested parties, and how the ISPs appeared to be put on the back foot.

Google Books and Fair Use: A Tale of Two Copyrights?

On 14 November 2013, the US District Court of the Southern District of New York issued a major ruling in favour of the Google Books project, concluding that Google’s unauthorized scanning and indexing of millions of copyrighted books in the collections of participating libraries and subsequently making snippets of these works available online through the “Google Books” search tool qualifies as a fair use under section 107 USCA. After assuming that Google’s actions constitute a prima facie case of copyright infringement, Judge Chin examined the four factors in section 107 USCA and concluded in favour of fair use on the grounds that the project provides “significant public benefits,” that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works (a search tool of scanned full-text books) is “highly transformative” and that it does not supersede or supplant these works. The fair use defence also excluded Google’s liability for making copies of scanned books available to the libraries (as well as under secondary liability since library actions were also found to be protected by fair use): it is aimed at enhancing lawful uses of the digitized books by the libraries for the advancement of the arts and sciences. A previous ruling by the same court of 22 March 2011 had rejected a settlement agreement proposed by the parties, on the grounds that it was “not fair, adequate, and reasonable”. The Authors Guild has appealed the ruling.

Essays on the Issue of Piracy in the Market of Information Goods

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-06