Urban Form at the Edge : Proceedings from ISUF 2013 [Volume 1]

Urban morphology as a field of study has developed primarily in Europe and North America, and more recently emerging as a recurrent topic in China and South America. As a counterpoint to this centric view, the ISUF 2013 conference explored aspects of ‘urban form at the edge’. In particular the conference examined ‘off centre areas’ such as India, Africa, Middle East, Central Asia and Australasia which require innovative approaches to the study of traditional, as well as post-colonial and contemporary, morphologies. Broader interpretations of urban form at the edge focus on minor centres and suburbia, with their developing and transilient character; edge cities and regional centres; and new technologies and approaches that are developing alongside established methods, tools and theories of urban morphology...

Proceedings of the 3rd International Subtropical Cities Conference 2011 Subtropical Cities: Subtropical Urbanism -Beyond Climate Change

Climate has been, throughout modern history, a primary attribute for attracting residents to the “Sunshine States” of Florida (USA) and Queensland (Australia). The first major group of settlers capitalized on the winter growing season to support a year-­‐round agricultural economy. As these economies developed, the climate attracted tourism and retirement industries. Yet as Florida and Queensland have blossomed under beneficial climates, the stresses acting on the natural environment are exacting a toll. Southeast Florida and eastern Queensland are among the most vulnerable coastal metropolitan areas in the world. In these places the certainty of sea level rise is measurable with impacts, empirically observable, that will continue to increase regardless of any climate change mitigation.1 The cities of the subtropics share a series of paradoxes relating to climate, resources, environment, and culture. As the subtropical climate entices new residents and visitors there are increasing costs associated with urban infrastructure and the ravages of violent weather. The carefree lifestyle of subtropical cities is increasingly dependent on scarce water and energy resources and the flow of tangible goods that support a trade economy. The natural environment is no longer exploitable as the survival of the human environment is contingent upon the ability of natural ecosystems to absorb the impact of human actions. The quality of subtropical living is challenged by the mounting pressures of population growth and rapid urbanization yet urban form and contemporary building design fail to take advantage of the subtropical zone’s natural attributes of abundant sunshine, cooling breezes and warm temperatures. Yet, by building a global network of local knowledge, subtropical cities like Brisbane, the City of Gold Coast and Fort Lauderdale, are confidently leading the way with innovative and inventive solutions for building resiliency and adaptation to climate change. The Centre for Subtropical Design at Queensland University of Technology organized the first international Subtropical Cities conference in Brisbane, Australia, where the “fault-­‐lines” of subtropical cities at breaking points were revealed. The second conference, held in 2008, shed a more optimistic light with the theme "From fault-­‐lines to sight-­‐lines -­‐ subtropical urbanism in 20-­‐20" highlighting the leadership exemplified in the vitality of small and large works from around the subtropical world. Yet beyond these isolated local actions the need for more cooperation and collaboration was identified as the key to moving beyond the problems of the present and foreseeable future. The spirit of leadership and collaboration has taken on new force, as two institutions from opposite sides of the globe joined together to host the 3rd international conference Subtropical Cities 2011 -­‐ Subtropical Urbanism: Beyond Climate Change. The collaboration between Florida Atlantic University and the Queensland University of Technology to host this conference, for the first time in the United States, forges a new direction in international cooperative research to address urban design solutions that support sustainable behaviours, resiliency and adaptation to sea level rise, green house gas (GHG) reduction, and climate change research in the areas of architecture and urban design, planning, and public policy. With southeast Queensland and southern Florida as contributors to this global effort among subtropical urban regions that share similar challenges, opportunities, and vulnerabilities our mutual aim is to advance the development and application of local knowledge to the global problems we share. The conference attracted over 150 participants from four continents. Presentations by authors were organized into three sub-­‐themes: Cultural/Place Identity, Environment and Ecology, and Social Economics. Each of the 22 papers presented underwent a double-­‐blind peer review by a panel of international experts among the disciplines and research areas represented. The Centre for Subtropical Design at the Queensland University of Technology is leading Australia in innovative environmental design with a multi-­‐disciplinary focus on creating places that are ‘at home’ in the warm humid subtropics. The Broward Community Design Collaborative at Florida Atlantic University's College for Design and Social Inquiry has built an interdisciplinary collaboration that is unique in the United States among the units of Architecture, Urban and Regional Planning, Social Work, Public Administration, together with the College of Engineering and Computer Science, the College of Science, and the Center for Environmental Studies, to engage in funded action research through design inquiry to solve the problems of development for urban resiliency and environmental sustainment. As we move beyond debates about climate change -­‐ now acting upon us -­‐ the subtropical urban regions of the world will continue to convene to demonstrate the power of local knowledge against global forces, thereby inspiring us as we work toward everyday engagement and action that can make our cities more livable, equitable, and green.

Proceedings of the Digital Cities 9 Workshop - Hackable Cities – From Subversive City Making to Systemic Change (Workshop) [Edited Proceedings]

The DC9 workshop takes place on June 27, 2015 in Limerick, Ireland and is titled “Hackable Cities: From Subversive City Making to Systemic Change”. The notion of “hacking” originates from the world of media technologies but is increasingly often being used for creative ideals and practices of city making. “City hacking” evokes more participatory, inclusive, decentralized, playful and subversive alternatives to often top-down ICT implementations in smart city making. However, these discourses about “hacking the city” are used ambiguously and are loaded with various ideological presumptions, which makes the term also problematic. For some “urban hacking” is about empowering citizens to organize around communal issues and perform aesthetic urban interventions. For others it raises questions about governance: what kind of “city hacks” should be encouraged or not, and who decides? Can city hacking be curated? For yet others, trendy participatory buzzwords like these are masquerades for deeply libertarian neoliberal values. Furthermore, a question is how “city hacking” may mature from the tactical level of smart and often playful interventions to the strategic level of enduring impact. The Digital Cities 9 workshop welcomes papers that explore the idea of “hackable city making” in constructive and critical ways.

Information Security and Privacy : Proceedings of the 9th Australasian Conference, ACISP 2004, Sydney, Australia, July 13-15, 2004.

Preface The 9th Australasian Conference on Information Security and Privacy (ACISP 2004) was held in Sydney, 13–15 July, 2004. The conference was sponsored by the Centre for Advanced Computing – Algorithms and Cryptography (ACAC), Information and Networked Security Systems Research (INSS), Macquarie University and the Australian Computer Society. The aims of the conference are to bring together researchers and practitioners working in areas of information security and privacy from universities, industry and government sectors. The conference program covered a range of aspects including cryptography, cryptanalysis, systems and network security. The program committee accepted 41 papers from 195 submissions. The reviewing process took six weeks and each paper was carefully evaluated by at least three members of the program committee. We appreciate the hard work of the members of the program committee and external referees who gave many hours of their valuable time. Of the accepted papers, there were nine from Korea, six from Australia, five each from Japan and the USA, three each from China and Singapore, two each from Canada and Switzerland, and one each from Belgium, France, Germany, Taiwan, The Netherlands and the UK. All the authors, whether or not their papers were accepted, made valued contributions to the conference. In addition to the contributed papers, Dr Arjen Lenstra gave an invited talk, entitled Likely and Unlikely Progress in Factoring. This year the program committee introduced the Best Student Paper Award. The winner of the prize for the Best Student Paper was Yan-Cheng Chang from Harvard University for his paper Single Database Private Information Retrieval with Logarithmic Communication. We would like to thank all the people involved in organizing this conference. In particular we would like to thank members of the organizing committee for their time and efforts, Andrina Brennan, Vijayakrishnan Pasupathinathan, Hartono Kurnio, Cecily Lenton, and members from ACAC and INSS.

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

We argue that safeguards are necessary to ensure human rights are adequately protected. All systems of blocking access to online content necessarily raise difficult and problematic issues of infringement of freedom of speech and access to information. Given the importance of access to information across the breadth of modern life, great care must be taken to ensure that any measures designed to protect copyright by blocking access to online locations are proportionate. Any measures to block access to online content must be carefully tailored to avoid serious and disproportionate impact on human rights. This means first that the measures must be effective and adapted to achieve a legitimate purpose. The experience of foreign jurisdictions suggests that this legislation is unlikely to be effective. Unless and until there is clear evidence that the proposed scheme is likely to increase effective returns to Australian creators, this legislation should not be introduced. Second, the principle of proportionality requires ensuring that the proposed legislation does not unnecessarily burden legitimate speech or access to information. As currently worded, the draft legislation may result in online locations being blocked even though they would, if operated in Australia, not contravene Australian law. This is unacceptable, and if introduced, the law should be drafted so that it is clearly limited only to foreign locations where there is clear and compelling evidence that the location would authorise copyright infringement if it were in Australia. Third, proportionality requires that measures are reasonable and strike an appropriate balance between competing interests. This draft legislation provides few safeguards for the public interest or the interests of private actors who would access legitimate information. New safeguards should be introduced to ensure that the public interest is well represented at both the stage of the primary application and at any applications to rescind or vary injunctions. We recommend that: The legislation not be introduced unless and until there is compelling evidence that it will have a real and significant positive impact on the effective incomes of Australian creators. The ‘facilitates an infringement’ test in s 115A(1)(b) should be replaced with ‘authorises infringement’. The ‘primary purpose’ test in s 115A(1)(c) should be replaced with: “the online location has no substantial non-infringing uses”. An explicit role for public interest groups as amici curiae should be introduced. Costs of successful applications should be borne by applicants. Injunctions should be valid only for renewable two year terms. Section 115A(5) should be clarified, and cl (b) and (c) be removed. The effectiveness of the scheme should be evaluated in two years.

Introduction to the Proceedings of the Workshop on User-Focused Service Engineering, Consumption and Aggregation (USECA) 2011

The first User-Focused Service Engineering, Consumption and Aggregation workshop (USECA) in 2011 was held in conjunction with the WISE 2011 conference in Sydney, Australia. Web services and related technology are a widely accepted standard architectural paradigm for application development. The idea of reusing existing software components to build new applications has been well documented and supported for the world of enterprise computing and professional developers. However, this powerful idea has not been transferred to end-users who have limited or no computing knowledge. The current methodologies, models, languages and tools developed for Web service composition are suited to IT professionals and people with years of training in computing technologies. It is still hard to imagine any of these technologies being used by business professionals, as opposed to computing professionals. © 2013 Springer-Verlag.

Damned to fame: The moral rights of the Beckett estate

The Company B production of Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot raises important questions about copyright law, moral rights, and dramatic works. The playwright's nephew and executor, Edward Beckett, threatened to bring a legal action against the Sydney company for breach of contract on the grounds that unauthorised music appeared in the production. The Company B production denied that the contract made any such express provisions. The director Neil Armfield complained: 'In coming here with its narrow prescriptions, its dead controlling hand, the Beckett estate seems to me to be the enemy of art'. In the biography Damned to fame, James Knowlson documents a number of other proceedings taken by Beckett and his agents to control the productions of his work: 'He was often represented as a tyrannical figure, an arch-controller of his work, ready to unleash fiery thunderbolts onto the head of any bold, innovative director, unwilling to follow his text and stage directions to the last counted dot and precisely timed pause.' However, Knowlson notes that Beckett was inconsistent in his willingness to use legal action: 'It made a tremendous difference if he liked and respected the persons involved or if he had been able to listen to their reasons for wanting to attempt something highly innovative or even slightly different'. Famously, in 1988, Beckett brought legal action against a Dutch theatre company, which wanted to stage a production of Waiting for Godot, with women acting all the roles. His lawyer argued that the integrity of the text was violated because actresses were substituted for the male actors asked for in the text. The judge in the Haarlem court ruled that the integrity of the play had not been violated, because the performance showed fidelity to the dialogue and the stage directions of the play. By contrast, in 1992, a French court held a stage director was liable for an infringement of Beckett's moral right of integrity because the director had staged Waiting for Godot with the two lead roles played by women. In 1998, a United States production of Waiting for Godot with a racially mixed cast attracted legal threats amid accusations it had 'injected race into the play'. In the 2000 New York Fringe Festival, a company made light of this ongoing conflict between the Beckett estate and artistic directors. The work was entitled: The complete lost works of Samuel Beckett as found in an envelope (partially burned) in a dustbin in Paris labelled 'Never to be performed. Never. Ever. EVER! Or I'll sue! I'LL SUE FROM THE GRAVE!'. The plot concerned a fight between three producers and the Beckett estate. In the wake of such disputes, Beckett and later his estate sought to tighten production contracts to state that no additions, omissions or alterations should be made to the text of the play or the stage directions and that no music, special effects or other supplements should be added without prior consent.

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.

Business Process Management: 13th International Conference, BPM 2015, Innsbruck, Austria, August 31 -- September 3, 2015, Proceedings

BPM 2015 was the 13th International Conference on Business Process Management. It provided a global forum for researchers to meet and exchange views over research topics and outcomes in business process management. BPM 2015 was hosted by the University of Innsbruck and took place August 31 to September 3.

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.

Moments of flux in intermediary liability for copyright infringement

This chapter provides an overview of a recent shift in regulatory strategies to address copyright infringement toward enlisting the assistance of general purpose Internet Service Providers. In Australia, the High Court held in 2012 that iiNet, a general purpose ISP, had no legal duty to police what its subscribers did with their internet connections. We provide an overview of three recent developments in Australian copyright law since that decision that demonstrate an emerging shift in the way that obligations are imposed on ISPs to govern the actions of their users without relying on secondary liability. The first is a new privately negotiated industry code that introduces a 'graduated response' system that requires ISPs to pass on warnings to subscribers who receive allegations of infringement. The second involves a recent series of Federal Court cases where rightsholders made a partially successful application to require ISPs to hand over the identifying details of subscribers whose households are alleged to have infringed copyright. The third is a new legislative scheme that will require ISPs to block access to foreign websites that 'facilitate' infringement. We argue that these shifts represent a greater sophistication in approaches to enrolling general purpose intermediaries in the regulatory project. We also suggest that these shifts represent a potentially disturbing trend towards enforcement of copyright law in a way that does not provide strong safeguards for the legitimate constitutional due process interests of users. We conclude with a call for greater attention and research to better understand how intermediaries make decisions when governing the conduct of users, how those decisions may be influenced by both state and non-state actors, and how the rights of individuals to due process can be adequately protected.