Australian Government Announces Broken Anti-Piracy Legislation

There's A Massive Government-Led Australian Piracy Crackdown On The Way - Gizmodo Australia

Today in a speech to the Australian Digital Alliance our current Attorney General, George Brandis, revealed the government's plan to tackle the scourge of online piracy. How does he plan to do this I hear you ask. Well through the old fallbacks of graduated response (the old three strikes rule), having ISPs take down sites that share copyrighted content and blocking access to websites like the infamous Pirate Bay.

Similar plans have been attempted overseas and have been hugely unsuccessful and previous attempts to introduce them to Australia failed before they even started.  Should these laws actually go through this time then I predict the following:

1. A distraught mother with sad looking children on her lap will appear on Today Tonight in tears saying that her vital internet was cut because "people were hacking it."

2. Precisely zero websites will be taken down by ISPs because no pirate sites are hosted in Australia, mainly because the ISPs are already well versed in taking down such sites for violating their own terms and conditions.

3. There will be a plethora of incorrectly blocked websites and most Australian tech publications will publish guides about how to easily bypass the artificial blockade.

4. The laws will be removed within an 18 to 24 month period due to the cost of enforcement outweighing any actual (or perceived) benefits.

But I have already covered the problems with this type of enforcement, and possible alternatives in depth (here is a selection of stories relating to piracy).  What I really want to do is delve into the remarkable timing of this announcement in line with recent events.

First up there is Foxtel obtaining exclusive rights to the next season of Game Of Thrones, a move that has most people anticipating Australia setting new records for pirated downloads of the popular show.  Previously it has been available within hours through iTunes and last year QuickFlix joined the club giving those fans who didn't have top tier Foxtel access an alternative to piracy.  It isn't much of a stretch to believe that the owners of Foxtel have been pushing hard to try to make sure that those who previously used alternate means have no other choices to signing up to $100+ pay TV package or be forced to wait for local DVD release.

The other development is the Australian Law Reform Commission's recommendation that the principles of fair use under Australian copyright law be broadened which would allow greater flexibility for personal, nonprofit use of purchased content. The mere suggestion of letting people use content they own in any way other than the specific versions they paid for must have had many rights holders in a panic at the thought of not being able to resell content in new formats to people who had bought previous versions. There is solid evidence of just how much entertainment "lobbyists" can pressure politicians so I dare say that George has been fielding many outraged phone calls since this report came down.

Unfortunately there will be no change to this status quo while rights holders hold on to the mistaken belief that every download is a lost sale.  There are multiple studies showing those who download more actually buy more content, there are studies showing how relaxing of DRM policies have led to increased sales and most importantly countries, including France and Great Britain, are in the process of dismantling these broken laws that our government seems hell bent on introducing.

So, in summary, the Australian government has just announced they intend to waste a whole heap of time and money.

Clever Geek Of The Week

Mystery as HarperCollins Hits Apple With Agatha Christie Piracy Claims - TorrentFreak

It's no secret that Google is regular sent requests to have search results removed if they allegedly link to less than official copies of media (in fact they removed over 5 million results in the last week of September 2013) but, luckily for HaperCollins, it isn't done blindly and without proper consideration.

You see, HarperCollins is the rights holder of the very popular books of Agatha Christie and, considering they would have paid a very pretty penny, they are very protective of their investment.  So much so they sent a request to have Google take down about 1,000 links they said clicked through to infringing copies.  Google ended up complying with about 90% of the request.  The majority of the remaining "illicit links" actually pointed to iTunes and the official copies that HarperCollins would in fact benefit from!

The most outstanding request relates to three ebooks that are currently is pre-release and not expected to be available until March this year!

So, HarperCollins, for be so zealous and forthright in your attempts to protect your copyright, for going to the extent of actually asking for ebooks you are officially selling to be removed from Google results and particularly for wanting to wipe results for ebooks you are hoping to sell in a few months time I hereby award you with this weeks Clever Geek Of The Week award.

Google Glass Gets Theatre Goer In Very Hot Water

FBI Drags Google Glass Man From Theater on Piracy Fears - TorrentFreak

(This story has since been updated to state that it was Homeland Security that dragged this guy out of the cinema)

Google Glass is gradually building up steam worldwide.  For those of you who don't know, Google Glass is wearable technology that displays images and information directly on to the lens of a pair of glasses worn by the user.

The reception to this tech has been mixed to say the least particularly with privacy concerns regarding the devices inbuilt camera.  There are already establishments banning the wearing of Google Glass on the premises and a lady in San Diego was arrested and fined after she wore a pair whilst driving.  But now the big guns have come out!

Last week, a Google Glass user and his wife decided to take a trip to their local AMC to check out Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit.  The man, who had attended the cinema a number of times while wearing the glasses, fitted with prescription lenses by the way, dutifully ensured the device was switched off before the screening commenced.

Approximately an hour into the film he was suddenly confronted by a kind gentleman who courteously shoved a badge into his face, pulled the Google Glasses off his face and demanded that he follow the gent outside.  There he met a number of police and mall security officers and was escorted off to a little room for a quiet chat about being caught illegally taping a movie with the "federal service" agent he met in the cinema who refused to identify exactly where he was from.

This chat consisted of demands of who he was working for, who he was going to give the recording too and how much was Google paying him to wear the allegedly infringing device.  When the man offered to show the agent that nothing had been recorded he was refused for fear that he would erase the evidence.

About three hours into this process some bright spark had the grand idea of bringing in a laptop and downloading the contents of the Google Glass's memory to preserve the evidence.  At this point the "federal service" agents spent a short time viewing some family photos before finally letting the man go.

Don't feel too bad, he did get a couple of free tickets so he could return to the cinema another time to finish watching the movie.

I assume that someone who actually knew what Google Glass looked like took it upon themselves to report that a potential cam job could be happening upon sighting this man entering a cinema but can it really be said the response was anything other than woefully excessive.  First up they did not give this guy the benefit of the doubt.  Secondly, a reasonable response would have been for the manager to quietly approach the man during the pre-movie waffle and ask him to take off the glasses, right?  Anyone?

*sigh*

Nope, obviously this potential, totally unproven, act of copyright infringement must be reported to the highest available authorities as soon as possible to ensure an aggressive, definitive response.  Seriously, Homeland Security?  I had a look on the About DHS page and they are very clear that their "vital mission" is "to secure the nation from the many threats we face".  Yep, so vital that they divert agents and resources to descend on a man like a truckload of bricks for the slightest possibility that he is recording an apparently mediocre movie.

I really wanted to put a snappy little joke at the end of this story, or even save it for review as a potential Clever Geek of The Week award but I am afraid it is just too far beyond the realms of any reasonable expectations!

Hold on people, this whole copyright debacle is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

Happy 30th Anniversary of Legality Betamax

Thirty Years Since Betamax, and Movies Are Still Being Made - TorrentFreak

While Betamax is a fair bit older than 30, it was originally produced in Japan in 1975, it was not declared as fully legal until 1984.  So why the delay?

Funnily enough as soon as the movie industry got wind of the fact that it could be used to *gasp* record movies screened on TV, or even copy tapes, they pretty much immediately took legal action to stop production and distribution of this pirating powerhouse!

On the 17th January 1984 the US Supreme Court took a different view and declared that the machine was legal and people could use it for recording of shows and movies for personal use which, at the time, was to be the death of Hollywood.

Well, here we are 30 years later with much more sophisticated methods that the old Betamax (which conceded defeat to the VHS format a scant 4 years after the court decision, even though it's last gasp occurred when production of Beta units ceased in 2002) and as far as I can tell Hollywood is still going strong and posting record profits.

What we see here is the birth of "Fair Use" provisions for personal use that allows you (yes, you as well) to record and time shift TV shows and even copy content you own to different formats, as long as you hang on to the original.  Funnily enough this concept is not very popular with content owners who would much prefer you to buy the same thing multiple times!

So let's all take a moment to pay tribute this clunky, overlarge piece of tech for it's continued legacy.  Betamax, we salute you.

The Hobbit Tops The Bittorrent Charts

‘The Hobbit’ Most Pirated Film of 2013 - TorrentFreak

The most downloaded movies of 2013 (at least via public Bittorrent sites) have now been revealed and in a very unsurprising surprise it is dominated by movies that did big business over the last 12 months regardless.

Topping the list was The Hobbit, which raked in over (use Dr Evil voice for effect if you so desire) one billion dollars.  Also in the billion dollar club is Iron Man 3, which came in at number 4.

The worst performing movie on the list was Gangster Squad (number 7) that managed to gross a whole $105,200,903... it is also, in my opinion, the worst movie on this list regardless, a factor that I think lead to it's comparatively poor performance when compared to the other nine.

Yet again this shows that downloads do not affect sales.  How many of these downloaders went to see the movie first, liked it then grabbed a copy as soon as a decent copy was available while waiting for the DVD/Blu-ray release.  How many downloaders didn't want to fork out the considerable cost of heading to the movies for a single view and still purchased the movie later for home consumption?

Despite the cries that downloads are killing cinema the stats show that box office takings are continuing to increase year after year.  Maybe Hollywood could increase its profits even more by not wasting money combatting something that is making no difference to its bottom line.  In fact the main reason people pirate is because of delays and limited viewing options in other countries (by the way this was determined back in 2012).

I'm already making the prediction that the new Hobbit movie will top the charts for 2014, both it ticket sales and downloads.

Iron Maiden Tracks Down Pirates, Rakes In The Profits Without Suing Anyone

Iron Maiden's Chasing Down Pirates And Making Bank Off Them - Gizmodo Australia

In a refreshing take on the battle against music piracy the classic rock band Iron Maiden has stepped up to the plate and taken a very refreshing approach.

After studying analytics about where their music was most downloaded (South America incidentally) instead of calling the lawyers the band instead got in touch with their tour manager.

Iron Maiden played a series of concerts where the copyright infringing downloaders were most prevalent and proceeded to rake in millions (yes, millions) of dollars including a take of $US2.5 million for one concert in Sao Paulo.

Given the rather small amount that makes it to the artist from CD and digital music sales I'd say this move has more than made up for any potential losses from illicit downloads and has also cemented the band's ongoing popularity in Brazil and its Latin American neighbours.

Now, if a band that has been around for almost 40 years can work out how to make music piracy work for them why the hell is it so hard for the major record labels?

Game Of Thrones Tops The Hittorrent Charts Again

Game of Thrones is Most Pirated TV Show For Second Year - The Escapist

Well, in a big surprise to next to no-one Game Of Thrones is the most downloaded show via Bittorrent for the second year running, and the response from the head of HBO was somewhat surprising.

Jeff Hawkes was quoted as saying this level of piracy was "better than an emmy" due to it leading to more subscriptions and of course DVD/Blu-ray sales further down the track.

Despite being one of the world's most popular show GoT remains severely limited when it comes to options to watch it as it screens.  A HBO exclusive in the US (and therefore only available on more expensive premium cable packages) and only available for streaming on HBO Go (which still requires a HBO subscription) with even more limitations in Australia, despite QuickFlix and Apple trying to offer same day streaming.  HBO even refused every offer made by Netflix (Torrent Freak) to stream the earlier seasons to a wider audience.

Over and over, year after year, the most popular shows top the download charts.  These aren't shows that are suffering for legitimate viewers, they simply do not have a delivery method that meets the full demand.

For a list of the full top 10 hittorrent shows of the year head over to the Torrent Freak version of this story.

How Do You Sell More Music? Be Less Protective...

A New Study Says You Sell More Music If You Get Rid Of Content Locks - Gizmodo Australia

An enterprising academic at the University of Toronto has completed a paper analysing the effects of removal of DRM from legitimate music downloads.

This was made possible by four different major music labels have content where they initially released albums with full copyright protection in place and then later dropped the DRM on those same albums.  After collating the statistics Laurina Zhang found an interesting pattern.

The ongoing average revenue from the albums after DRM was dropped increased 10%.  While the more popular albums (and therefore more appealing to the average pirate) did not increase the results show there was no actual loss of revenue from the removal of copyright protection.  It also showed that the longer the music was kept in a DRM free state the more consistently it kept selling.

So we have just another sign that the locking down of content does not actually assist sales in any way, in fact the more a company allows the end customer to treat their purchase as their own property the better it sells.  Here's hoping one day the message actually gets through!

Dr Who and Piracy, The Scourge of 1964

BBC Has Reportedly Found Even More Missing Doctor Who Episodes, This Time From 1964 - Gizmodo Australia

On the eve of the worldwide simultaneous broadcast of the 50th Anniversary Doctor Who episode The Mirror reports another lost episode has resurfaced, the complete 7 episode run of "Marco Polo" with first Doctor, William Hartnell.  It's missing the audio but apparently the BBC has that and can painstakingly restore it.

The ironic part of this whole shebang is that as the biggest attempt to share new content and reduce piracy is about to take place the only reason this episode still exists is because an enterprising and way ahead of his time individual decided to take his 16mm camera and film the episodes off his TV.  Yep, "Marco Polo" is still around because of piracy.

I'd be interested in finding out if this is the earliest known evidence of TV show piracy.  Since the episodes screened in 1964 it is pretty unlikely this was all that widespread.  I also expect the current rights holders to track down the budding pirates family in order to sue for damages.

Arrrr-stralians. Are We Now Hooked On Piracy?

Cheap, legal options wouldn’t stop Australians pirating - Delimiter

A new survey by Essential Research has been conducted on Australians and our filthy downloading habits.  The results, which I am surprised haven't been grabbed by the anti-piracy lobby and waved from the nearest mountain top, show that if given cheap and equal access to content 20% of respondents who currently pirate would still continue to download copyright infringing content.

Just think about that for a moment.  Look past the attention grabbing headline of the source story and consider that from the sample group 80% would consider using cheaper paid services if they were available.  That is impressive and certainly shows quite a shift from what has long been assumed as the norm.

There is no way to guarantee 0% piracy.  Even in the USA, home of Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go and a plethora of inexpensive cable TV channels and streaming services there still exists a contingent of dedicated downloaders who will NEVER pay for content.  And if they were never going to pay then there is no lost sale because of them.

Another interesting little snippet in the survey is one sentence stating "Downloading from the internet has dropped somewhat since it was last measured in May 2012".  A sizeable chunk of this would be because music and games now have the sort of services that can compete with piracy with convenience.  iTunes started it all when the music industry was bemoaning lost sales due to services like Napster and Kazaa.  Services like Rdio and Spotify now offer millions of songs on demand through free, advertising supported, models.  Steam has revolutionised how PC games are sold and helped push acceptance of purchasing of digital content through other services such as Xbox Live and the Playstation Network.

All this has evolved after someone stood up and decided to change the status quo, who decided to provide something to the consumer that offers convenience.  If the movie and TV rights holders expect people to stop downloading illicitly then they need someone to step up and provide the services, and then support it!

If you build it, they will come.  Just don't expect everyone.

The MPAA Finally Found Real Pirates

MPAA: 'Notorious' Melbourne Market One Of World's Worst Piracy Blackspots - Gizmodo Australia

When the word "piracy" is thrown around it is generally used as a general term for downloading stuff for free.  It's one of those terms that has become general use while not being entirely accurate.  Sharing content on the internet comes under the banner of "copyright infringement".  The piracy aspect is only really comes in when someone is profiting from the sale of copyright infringing content.

Now that we have the lesson out of the way let's get to the actual story.  The MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) has apparently had investigators scouring the world looking for the dark alleys and seedy dives that are selling pirated movies.  So who is right up there amongst the biggest offenders?  That's right, Australians!

The Caribbean Gardens and Markets in Melbourne is a 10,000 square covered market and one of the biggest in Australia.  Allegedly in among the 1,000 plus stalls you can find 10 to 20 individuals selling pirated DVDs including recently released titles.  Wow this place really is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

But it gets better.  Since the Trans Pacific Partnership talks (which started in 2010 and are still going) put copyright piracy in the same category as full scale counterfeiting the MPAA and associated organisations have been touting the line that copyright infringement supports terrorism.  While this current report doesn't take it to that extreme they still take the opportunity to point out that since some of the locations on the list are associated with underground criminal organisations that must mean ALL the places are associated with underground criminal organisations.  We don't have a handful of people with access to a multi DVD burner and an inkjet printer, no, we have gangsters running the face paint stall, mini golf and train rides!

It does seem a bit odd that this rather excessive report comes out at the same time the Australian Government announced they were looking into an anti-piracy plan.  This, along with talk  promising to allow greater involvement of industry groups in trade negotiations, does not bode well for the digital freedom that Australians have enjoyed while other countries have been laboured with everything from "three strikes" through to enforced blocking of websites.

Getting back to the original subject I am utterly amazed that an industry that is losing so much money year after year can afford to pay for investigators to travel the world and discover terrible, yet family friendly, places like the Carribean Gardens and Market.  And somehow they still manage to scrape together a measly $200,000,000 for a movie such as Iron Man 3 (which incidentally has grossed at least $1.2 billion so far).

Clever Geek Of The Week (Delayed edition)

Cosplayer Cops Legal Threat From...Carpet Company - Kotaku Australia

When legal threats rear up in relation to games it is usually pretty far fetched so it takes something extra special to stand out from the crowd.

I'm not sure if there has been a cosplay related legal threat before.  If so then they are spectacularly rare.

I particularly creative cosplayer, Harrison Krix, and DragonCon attender obviously managed to get a good look at the decor of the Marriot Marquis Atlanta and designed an incredible camouflage outfit matching the carpet at the convention venue.

His outfit was such a hit that quite a few people asked for the material.  Harrison took this golden opportunity to on-sell his stash, and that is where the problem started.

The manufacturer of the carpet, Couristan, got wind of this little venture and subsequently sent a Cease and Desist order claiming he was infringing the copyright of their carpet design...  I honestly can not think of anything to say about this.

So to the legal department at Couristan for being overzealous and over protective in response to something which would have NO impact on their business or profits I hereby award you this week's "Clever Geek of the Week" award.

English Study States What We All Know But Aren't Meant To Believe

Digital piracy not harming entertainment industries - CBC

Yep, a fresh study by the London School of Economics has shown that, despite music and movie industry claims, revenue for music and movies have increased and, in fact, 2012 was one of the best years for the entertainment industry.

So how has this magic happened?  Well a large part of it is the adoption and growth of online distribution methods.  After being considered the violator of content and a den of iniquity frequented by digital freeloaders the internet is finally showing that it is a massive marketing and sales tool.  This alongside the fact that digital piracy continues to grow each year as well means that the entertainment industry has a good thing going, and a lot of it they don't even have to pay for.

It's not just music and movies though, books and videogames are also having a digital resurgence.  Actual physical media such as DVDs, CDs and actual paper books are down, but the drop in sales is well and truly exceeded by the digital sales boom across the board.

This isn't the first study to show that the internet is a useful, and profitable, tool and it won't be the last.  But this one is English so I guess it's a little more classy.

Does this mean the entertainment industries hardline stance on unauthorised copying and its insistence that piracy is causing billions (yes, billions) of dollars in lost revenue?  Somehow I doubt it.

Maybe If Kids Tell Kids To Not Copy Then Kids Won't Copy... Sure!

The Content Industry Is Designing Anti-Piracy Lesson Plans For Kids - Gizmodo Australia

Yet again a wonderfully acronym named group that obviously and blatantly has nothing to do with any of the major copyright enforcers has decided to release an "educational" video about the dangers of copyright infringement.

The rather horrifically named "iKeepSafe" or the Internet Keep Safe Coalition (seriously, I mean... seriously) has produced a rather wonderful video aimed at sixth graders where everyday normal kids, whose parents are apparently successful songwriters and game programmers, very sincerely and earnestly talk about the importance of copyright.

I was going to embed the video for your convenience, but apparently copyright presents this important message about copyright being easily shared across the internet.  Wow.  It's at the link above.

Now this is not the first time something like this has been tried.  I have seen web comics, pamphlets, wonderfully creative statistics and lets not forget the unskippable anti-piracy warnings on every DVD/Blu-ray that is legitimately purchased!

Seriously though, why are they wasting their time.  The fact is that this will have practically no effect on piracy rates.  The fact is that research has shown that people who pirate are more likely to spend more money on music, movies and games.  The fact is that iKeepSafe is really throwing their money away, but not just for the reasons listed in this paragraph.

I'm sure they can get this guy pretty cheap...

He's gotta be down with the cool kids.

I will leave you with the following important message:

Clever Geek Of The Week

Spotify Sued By Ministry Of Sound Over Playlists Mirroring Compilation Albums - Gizmodo Australia

I am always entertained by spurious lawsuits but this one is also a bit concerning.

Music label Ministry Of Sound, after allowing Spotify access to its music, noticed that users were creating playlists that followed the same track structure as their compilation albums.  Apparently this means Spotify is infringing MoS's copyright.

Okay, think about that.  Spotify users are organising available tracks in the same order as compilation albums.  Gasp!  I guess the playlists I have based on movie soundtracks are also a no-no.

This really comes down to the following logic.  Hey, they are listening to the tracks in the same order as our CD, that means they won't buy our CD, that means we can't make extra money off the music that we've already charged millions of dollars to allow to be played on Spotify, oh noes we must stop this rampant piracy!  Maybe they should ask to check everyones iTunes accounts just in case they have set up similar playlists on their iPods.  Hmm, better check Rdio and Deezer and all the other music services out there.  Better scan everyone's PC hard drives just in case there is an illicit playlist lurking at the bottom of a music folder.

At the end of the day if they force Spotify to remove these playlists then they will be directly hurting those they should be taking the best care of, the consumer.  There is also the very real possibility that by allowing these playlists to be shared they may actually help sell a few copies of their precious compilations.

So, for finding a new target in the ever increasingly widespread net of copyright infringement and attacking your own customers in the process, I hereby present Ministry Of Sound with this weeks Clever Geek of the Week award.

Recommendations From Australia's IT Pricing Inquiry Somewhat Surprising

Beating The Australia Tax: How The Parliament Wants To Stop IT Rip-Offs - Gizmodo Australia

The Australian Government's inquiry into higher pricing of IT goods in Australia, or the Australia Tax as it is commonly referred to, has been silently plodding along with just occasional bursts of information.  While some of it was encouraging overall confidence about an outcome favourable to the consumer was somewhat lacking.

First let's have a quick bit of background.  Prices for stuff like songs from iTunes right through to major commercial software is more expensive in Australia.  We pay more for subscription services and any amount of hardware.  My favourite example is that for the price of a digital download of a particular professional Adobe product in Australia you can fly to Los Angeles, buy a physical copy of the software, get overnight accommodation and then fly back...  and still have money left over!

The 150 page report has now been handed down and has 10 recommendations. I don't intend to write a massive analysis of the report, instead I'll summarise the recommendations and potential impact if they miraculously become law...

Price discrimination and consumer impacts

1. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) develop a comprehensive program to monitor and report expenditure of IT products domestically and overseas.

This sees the ABS studying and keeping track of the costs Aussies pay for IT products to keep an eye out for potential Australia Tax offenders.

2.  The Australian Government, in consultation with universities, conduct a comprehensive study of future IT needs and costs faced by Australian universities. 

This really relates to keeping costs down and optimising IT purchases for Australian education institutions which is, let's face it, a good thing.

3.  The Australian Government consider a whole of government IT procurement policy.

By having a whole of government approach to IT purchasing it helps the Government make sure they are getting the best deal across the board.  No notes on whether a reduction in IT costs would flow through to taxpayers though (HA, as if).

Copyright, circumvention, competition and remedies

4.  Parallel import restrictions still found in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) be lifted and the parallel importation defence in the Trade Marks Act 1995 be reviewed and broadened.

First up, seriously, this has been enshrined in law since 1968?  Way to keep up guys.  Essentially this refers to importing of physical media (particularly books) and selling at a lower price than the standard Australian retail price, thereby reducing the opportunity for local retailers and content producers to earn an income.  So we know the Australia Tax was well in place 45 years ago.  Lifting this in a global marketplace makes sense and encourages competition.  The Trade Marks Act review is more about preventing cheap, unauthorised knock offs from flooding the market.

5.  The Copyright's Act section 10(1) anti-circumvention provisions be amended to clarify and secure consumers' rights to circumvent technical regional restrictions.

The simplest example of this is mod-chips for games consoles.  For a brief period it was actually legal to mod (or offer a modding service) consoles for the purpose of playing imported games.  Lobbying from various parties closed this loophole and it is currently considered an act of copyright violation to bypass any technical restrictions.  This recommendation is a step backwards in a good way!

6.  The Government investigate options to educate consumers and business in the extent and tools of circumventing geoblocking mechanisms and how their rights may be affected should they do so.

Here is my first big wow moment.  Geoblocking is what prevents Australians from accessing digital content from a different region (for example the US iTunes store) where the price of that content is cheaper.  Choice magazine has already run stories showing how to circumvent geoblocking, but to recommend that the Government officially support bypassing these restrictions would have to be a world first!  Of course this only applies to products that are officially being sold in Australia so I'm afraid it does not mean free reign access to things like Netflix and Hulu since they are not offered in our market.

7.  Consider the creation of a "right of resale" for digitally distributed content and clarification of "fair use" rights for consumers, business and educational institutions, including restrictions on vendors' ability to lock content to a particular ecosystem.

Second wow moment!  Reselling of digital products has been quite the contentious issue amongst digital consumers.  Essentially you are buying a licence to access a product instead of the product itself.  By enforcing a "right of resale" we have enforcement of the consumers' right to ownership of their purchase.  Additionally the "fair use" right refers to being able to make a copy of your content in a more convenient format which ties in nicely with restrictions of locking content to a particular device or system.  A great example is ebooks.  Say you own a Kindle reader, but Kobo has a book you particularly want at a much better price.  This recommendation would allow you to purchase the Kobo edition and convert it to a format that you can use for your personal enjoyment.

The problem with the above is there does need to be some measure in place to ensure that the consumer doesn't keep their "fair use" copy should the resell the original.  Essentially that would mean they now have an copyright infringing copy but the personal care factor would be quite low.

8.  Repealing of section 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.

This one has pretty much defeated me.  The general gist I get it that it relates to contravention of the Act that relates to licence restrictions.  This would be a logical follow on from the previous recommendation where a company tried to enforce digital restrictions and tried to pursue someone for bypassing their copy protection in order to use their content on a different device.  I may be wrong.

9.  The Australian Government consider a ban on geoblocking as a last resort if nothing else works.

Great idea!  Good luck enforcing it though.

10.  The Australian Government investigate amending the Competition and Consumer Act so that contracts or terms of service that enforce geoblocking are considered void.

Adobe would be hating this one.  It is pretty standard in licensing agreements that if you buy a digital product from a different region then you can not get any support for that product which effectively locks you to the local product for commercial software.  Again this would only relate to products available in Australia so still no Netflix or Hulu guys.

Conclusion

There are some seriously revolutionary proposals up there, especially with regard to long overdue copyright reform.  It would be nice to think that the recommendations will make it through, however there is always a but, possibly multiple buts.

With a federal election looming none of the above is going to get any consideration until it's all over and the dust has settled, plus should we see a change of government then there is a good chance it'll get buried and not see the light of day until there is sufficient outcry from the general public.  It is unlikely there will be enough interest to make this an election issue so it will be way at the bottom of the list of priorities for both sides.

Should it reach parliament for consideration it will have to contend with lobbying from a number of businesses and the entertainment industry.  It would not be the first time reform has been overturned through such lobbying and since "fair use" provisions feeds Hollywood's fear of not being able to resell you the same content in a more up to date format you better believe they'll be doing all they can to stop it.

We will probably see an initial roll on effect of slightly better prices while the IT industry gauges the possible impact of the recommendations and waits for the official Government response.  Unfortunately I don't think we'll be seeing legislative change anytime soon so once the next big issue diverts attention the prices will creep back up and the Australia Tax will again be in full effect.  I hope that at the very least we'll see the "fair use" recommendations fix the ridiculous situation where we are allowed to have a copy of purchased content, but we are not allowed to bypass copy protection or download a copy in order to get it.

People Power in Finland Pushing for Copyright Reform

Finland Considers "Crowdsourced" Copyright Law - The Escapist

It is amazing the things you learn.  It turns out that over in Finland if you can get 50,000 people to support suggested changes to legislation within a six month period then it will get considered by parliament, and this is exactly what has happened with "The Common Sense in Copyright Act" proposal that made it to the elusive target with one day to spare!

The Finnish legislative "crowd sourcing" organisation Open Ministry is seeking reforms to reduce penalties, increase fair use, remove "unfair" clauses in recording contracts and most importantly allow people to make personal use copies of media they already own.

This will be the first time that any push for copyright law changes has not come from lobby groups representing media companies so maybe, just maybe, this will be the first steps towards laws that actually take the consumers into consideration.

The proposals are not due to go before the Finnish parliament until early 2014.  Here's hoping there aren't too many attempts to derail it before it gets there.

Clever Geek of the Week

Minecraft Hit With Legal Complaint From Golf Company - The Escapist

Oh I love how legal eagles representing companies get so far off target that you can't even hear the wooshing sound as they fly past at high speed.

So, for those who don't know, Minecraft is a game that is basically one big sandbox.  It allows players to create just about anything, from roller coasters to walk through recreations of the Star Ship Enterprise.  So what has made it fall foul with legal representatives?

Users have been making Putt Putt Golf courses.

Apparently this dire infringement of the "Putt Putt" brand name (which I didn't even know was a thing up till now) has caused the game's creator Mojang to fall afoul of the Putt Putt company.  Never mind that there is a BIG disclaimer in the terms and conditions of Minecraft that the creators take no responsibility for whatever their users, with their fiendish imaginations, can concoct.  I'm sure not even the kings of litigation for unauthorised use of names, Disneyland, would take action against what some users are making.

I've said it before, I'll say it again.  Legal companies and copyright law need to join us in the 21st century.  The old way of tracking down people blatantly profiting off someone elses work doesn't work for people who are merely taking inspiration from something and sharing it, without personal profit, with others.  You are not being ripped off Putt Putt, if anything it is free advertising and if it gets just one person to visit one of your courses then it works to your advantage.

So Putt Putt, via your legal representatives, I hereby award you this weeks "Clever Geek of the Week" award.

Copyright Craziness Takes Down Retro Game Site

Underground Gamer Goes Down Citing Legal Problems (TorrentFreak)

I came across this disturbing news while trying to find out why I couldn't access Underground Gamer.

For those who don't know, Underground Gamer was a site that offered bittorrent files for games with the strict rule that they would not allow anything released in the last 10 years. It was set up to preserve games no longer supported or even playable on modern hardware. It was a treasure trove for unreleased betas and many of the entries included historical information, video footage and all sorts of associated information. Core site members would even track down rare titles and restore and preserve them to ensure they were not lost. In essence this was no Pirate Bay, UG was dedicated to keeping classic games alive. Good luck finding a still playable data cassette of Mission Impossible for the Commodore 64.

In summary the site administrators took the site down after receiving a threatening letter from a copyright focused legal firm because FIFA 98 was available for download on the site.

FIFA 98... As in 1998. The letter wasn't even from the developers or the publishers. Some law firm took it upon themselves to draw up a legal threat over a 16 year old game that is no longer developed, supported or even sold, anywhere, at all.

Also consider that this game ran on Windows 95 and 98 so good luck actually trying to profit from something that won't even run on modern PCs (don't believe that compatibility crap buried in your system settings).

So here is a classic example of what is wrong with copyright "law".  When a site that is dedicated to preserving media that is disappearing, and has a dedicated user base that fully supports its ideals, can be taken down because a money grabbing legal firm that isn't even directly representing the company that released a product 16 years ago tasked action against it then some serious reconsideration needs to be undertaken. No-one is losing a sale, no-one is losing money and NO-ONE is profiting illegally from anything on UG.

So, legal firm, go prosecute some real crime.