RE: [Linux-aus] A speech by AG Ruddock "No Fair Use For You!"

["Kimberlee Weatherall" <k.weatherall@unimelb.edu.au>]

Well, here's what I'm thinking:
- the original press release from government, back in May 2006, suggested
that the government was planning to introduce 'a time-shifting exception to
allow consumers to record most television and radio programs to view or
listen to once at a later time'
- the key thing this was aimed at was distinguishing between 'librarying'
(ie, recording and keeping forever to watch over and over - something
copyright owners think is their right, and their market (eg, for videos and
DVDs) and 'time-shifting' (taping to watch at a convenient time).  The
government wanted to legitimate the latter, but not the former.
- the government copped a fair bit of flack for the 'watch once' requirement
- Josh Gans' reaction was my favourite - he asked whether it was April
Fools' Day.
- the AG went into his shell and hasn't released the legislation, but might
pay attention to the flack and change the rule.  One way to do that would be
to enact a provision like the UK one (s 70), which excludes from
infringement ' making in domestic premises for private and domestic use of a
recording of a broadcast solely for the purpose of enabling it to be viewed
or listened to at a more convenient time'.  Arguably, that kind of provision
allows people to rewind, or to have multiple viewings by different members
of the family.
- then again, the AG's speech might not have changed anything.  
- we just won't know until we see the legislation.

Cheers

Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Oxer [mailto:jon@ivt.com.au] 
Sent: Wednesday, 6 September 2006 3:39 PM
To: James Purser
Cc: Kimberlee Weatherall; 'Nathan Bailey'; linux-aus@linux.org.au
Subject: RE: [Linux-aus] A speech by AG Ruddock "No Fair Use For You!"

On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 15:17 +1000, James Purser wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 14:17 +1000, Kimberlee Weatherall wrote:
> > Actually, this speech is interesting because it does not say that the
> > government is going to allow taping to watch once - instead, it says
that
> > the law won't legitimise people watching 'over and over'.  This might be
a
> > 'backing away' from the full 'no rewind' law to something akin to a
'watch
> > at convenience but don't library' law.
> > 
> Hmm, I hadn't picked up on that distinction.

I'm still not sure I understand it!

I mentally equate "over and over" with "more than once", ie: no-rewind.
Or is it a more subtle difference, like "you can watch it at a later
time, and rewind parts of it if you need to, but not rewind the entire
thing and watch it twice"?

Seems very nebulous to me. Anyone care to clarify?

Cheers   :-)
-- 
Jonathan Oxer <jon@ivt.com.au>
Ph +61 3 9723 9399