The government as proprietor, preserver and user of copyright material under the Copyright Act 1968 (CTH)

This thesis examines the role of government as proprietor, preserver and user of copyright material under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) and the policy considerations which Australian law should take into account in that role. There are two recurring themes arising in this examination which are significant to the recommendations and conclusions. The first is whether the needs and status of government should be different from private sector institutions, which also obtain copyright protection under the law. This theme stems from the 2005 Report on Crown Copyright by the Copyright Law Review Committee and the earlier Ergas Committee Report which are discussed in Chapters 2 and 8 of this thesis. The second is to identify the relationship between government copyright law and policy, national cultural policy and fundamental governance values. This theme goes to the essence of the thesis. For example, does the law and practice of government copyright properly reflect technological change in the way we now access and use information and does it facilitate the modern information management principles of government? Is the law and practice of government copyright consistent with the greater openness and accountability of government? The thesis concludes that government copyright law and practice in each of the three governmental roles recognised under the Copyright Act 1968 has not responded adequately to the information age and to the desire and the ability of individuals to access information quickly and effectively. The solution offered in this thesis is reform of the law and of public policy that is in step with access to information policy, the promotion of better communication and interaction with the community, and the enhanced preservation of government and private copyright materials for reasons of government accountability, effective administration and national culture and heritage.

Are the offences in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) legitimate and effective? : an analysis based in harm and social norms theory

This thesis examines the effectiveness of offences in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) in the online environment. The application of social norm theories suggests that the offences will be ineffective in creating an effective deterrent to non-commercial copyright infringement.

Copyright exceptions beyond the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)

Exceptions are an important part of the Australian copyright law landscape due to the role they play in delineating the extent of the rights held by copyright owners and, correspondingly, the permitted activities of users of copyright materials. The nature and scope of copyright exceptions has been examined in several reviews of copyright law and are again being considered by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) as part of the ‘Copyright and the Digital Economy’ review which is currently underway. The ALRC’s terms of reference require it to examine, inter alia, ‘whether the exceptions and statutory licences in the Copyright Act 1968, are adequate and appropriate in the digital environment.’ While the ALRC inquiry focuses on exceptions provided under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (“Copyright Act”), there are several copyright exceptions in other Commonwealth statutes which are of relevance and which should not be overlooked.

Comment la crainte de sous-protection engendrera la catastrophe de la surprotection:examen constitutionnel du Digital Millenium Copyright Act

Chaque apparition d’une nouvelle technologie remet inévitablement en cause le cadre législatif établi pour protéger les droits de propriété. Cependant, avec la numérisation de l’information et l’avènement d’Internet, il est de plus en plus facile de reproduire et de distribuer librement des œuvres protégées. Toutefois, depuis le 20 décembre 1996, l’Organisation Mondiale de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OMPI) a adopté deux traités ayant pour objectif principal d’adapter le cadre juridique du droit d’auteur aux nouvelles technologies. C’est pour se conformer à ces traités que l’administration Clinton a adopté le Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) en 1998. Cet article examine d’abord les dimensions constitutionnelle du Copyright américain, et plus spécifiquement certaines limites qui viennent tempérer les prérogatives exclusives des titulaires de droits, notamment le domaine public et les usages équitables possibles d’ une œuvre. Sont ensuite examinés le DMCA et sa conformité aux principes énoncés à la clause constitutionnelle, source du pouvoir législatif du Congrès américain en matière de Copyright. De plus, comme le DMCA interdit non seulement le contournement de technologies protégeant une œuvre en format numérique, mais également la fabrication et la diffusion de technologies permettant d’arriver à cette fin, cet article analyse les répercussions de cette loi sur la liberté d’expression.

The copyright act, chapter 32, R.S.C. 1927 as amended by Chapter 8, 1931, Chapter 18, 1935, Chapter 28, 1936, Chapter 27, 1938.

At head of title: Office consolidation.

Miller's modern acting drama, consisting of the most popular pieces produced at the London theatres, subject to the provisions of the Dramatic copyright act ...

Half-title: Modern acting drama.

The Life of an Author: Samuel Egerton Brydges and the Copyright Act 1814

The history of literary copyright in nineteenth century Britain is dominated - understandably perhaps - by a preoccupation with the passing and impact of the Copyright Amendment Act 1842, so ably lobbied for by Sir Thomas Noon Talfourd. This article, however, draws attention away from the 1842 Act towards the Copyright Act 1814, the first legislative provision within British copyright law to introduce a lifetime term of protection for the author. Why and on what basis did the legislature do so?
In bringing a renewed attention to this often overlooked legislative measure, we consider the context and logic that underpinned to grant of a copyright term that was tethered to the life of the author. In doing so, we might also find a useful prism through which to look afresh at current copyright debates concerning the appropriate nature and scope of copyright protection in the 21st century.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1801

Legislation extending the effect of the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) to Ireland (following the Act of Union 1800 and the unification of Great Britain and Ireland), as well as the first statutory provision to make use of the term ‘copyright'. The commentary assesses the substance of the legislation, its relationship with the King's Bench decision of Beckford v. Hood (uk_1798a), and its impact upon the Irish book trade.

Commentary on Copyright Act 1814

Legislation replacing the Statute of Anne 1710 (uk_1710) and providing that copyright in a literary work would last for twenty-eight years from the time of publication, but that ‘if the author shall be living' at the end of that period then the work was to be protected ‘for the residue of his natural life'.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular the controversy over the library deposit provision in the wake of the decision in Beckford v. Hood (1798) (uk_1798a). The commentary suggests that the introduction of the reversionary lifetime copyright term had more to do with the opportunistic and timely intervention of one Member of Parliament (Samuel Egerton Brydges) than with any principled or considered position adopted on the part of the legislature.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1838

Legislation providing that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, grant copyright protection, within Britain and its Dominions, to the authors of literary works first published abroad for a period specified within the Order but not exceeding the domestic copyright term. The Act provided the first occasion on which the British legislature offered the possibility of copyright protection for the work of foreign authors. Its timing is indicative of the widespread attention which the issue of international copyright had begun to attract in Britain, on the continent, and in the United States. The commentary describes the background to the legislation in relation to British attitudes to the importation of foreign works throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and in the context of early nineteenth century debates before the courts as to whether the work of foreign authors was in any event protected under existing legislative measures (see also: uk_1854). The commentary also explores the reasons for the failure of the British government to successfully negotiate any bilateral agreements under the legislation, but nevertheless suggests that the 1838 Act provided an important platform upon which to build a subsequent and more successful regime of international copyright protection (see also: uk_1844; uk_1852; uk_1886).

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1844

Legislation replacing the International Copyright Act 1838 (uk_1838) and providing that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, grant to foreign authors both copyright protection for works of literature, drama, music and art, as well as performance rights for dramatic pieces and musical compositions. The document contains the following associated material: Bill to amend Law relating to International Copyright 1844 (uk_1844a).
This Act addressed perceived inadequacies of the International Copyright Act 1838 (uk_1838) by expanding upon both the subject-matter and the nature of the rights that might be included in a reciprocal copyright arrangement with a foreign state. It also specifically linked the protections that foreign authors would enjoy within Britain to existing domestic copyright legislation. Following this legislation Britain successfully negotiated a series of bilateral international copyright treaties the first of which was concluded with Prussia in May 1846.
The commentary locates the Act within existing legislative provisions designed to address the problem of the market for cheap foreign imports of British books. It suggests that, regardless of the existence of stringent measures targeting unlawful foreign imports, the British government regarded a system of international copyright protection as integral in both addressing the import issue and in fostering a more secure overseas market in the interests of the British book trade.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1852

Legislation introducing the concept of translation rights within British copyright law. The document contains the following associated material: Hansard: 119 (1852): 498-502 (uk_1852a); 121 (1852): 4 (uk_1852b); Anglo-French Copyright Treaty (uk_1851).
Introduced to implement the obligations of the Anglo-French Copyright Convention, agreed in November 1851, this Act provided that the British monarch could, by Order in Council, provide foreign authors with the right to prevent the reproduction and performance of their literary and dramatic works in translation. The Act also introduces the first statutorily defined permitted acts within the UK, and is indicative of the increasing influence that international standards and obligations began to exert upon the content and substance of domestic copyright law.
The commentary locates the Act within the context of the two previous International Copyright Acts (see: uk_1838; uk_1844) and the Anglo-French Convention, highlighting the selective manner in which the British legislature implemented its obligations under the 1851 Convention, in particular in drawing a distinction between the reproduction of political and non-political material, as well as the difficulty that foreign authors experienced in complying with the provisions of the legislation.

Commentary on Fine Arts Copyright Act 1862

Legislation conferring copyright protection on paintings, drawings, and photographs for the life of the author plus a seven year post mortem term. The Act was also innovative in de-coupling the copyright term from the event of publication, in providing artists with a new form of ‘moral rights' protection, and in introducing the concept of "originality" as the standard threshold for copyright protection.
The commentary explores the background to the legislation, and in particular, the international copyright regime, the nature of the art market in eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the role of the Society of Artists in lobbying for legislative protection, and the impetus which the International Exhibition provided for securing the same. The commentary also considers how the 1862 Bill, in its earliest incarnation, incorporated elements that would have signalled a radical departure from established copyright norms. In particular, the Bill proposed: that copyright protection should not be contingent upon registration; and that protection should be offered on a universal basis, regardless of an artists' nationality, and regardless of where the work in question was created.