Australian Digital Alliance: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
conflict of interest |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{coi}} |
|||
{{Infobox company |
|||
| logo = [[Image:ADA Logo.gif]] |
|||
| industry = Copyright |
|||
| location_city = Canberra |
|||
| location_country = Australia |
|||
| num_directors = 6 |
|||
| date_founded = 1998 |
|||
| foundation = 1998 |
|||
| company_type = Public Interest |
|||
| operating_income = Member Contributions |
|||
| homepage = *[http://www.digital.org.au/index.htm Official Site] |
|||
}} |
|||
The '''Australian Digital Alliance''' ('''ADA''') is a non-profit coalition of public and private sector interests. The ADA was formed to promote balanced copyright law by providing an effective voice for the public interest perspective in debates about copyright change and reform. The ADA engages with government through submissions, lobbying, and media activities. |
|||
The ADA works closely with its sister organisation, the [[Australian Libraries Copyright Committee]] ('''ALCC'''). The ALCC is the main consultative body and policy forum for the discussion of copyright issues affecting Australian libraries. It develops policy and advocates action appropriate for the role of libraries as information providers and preservers in Australia. The two bodies share a copyright adviser, and generally make joint submissions to government. |
|||
__TOC__ |
|||
== The Need for Balanced Copyright Law == |
|||
The objective of copyright law is to reward creation and encourage continued innovation. Copyright law does this by preventing people from ‘free-riding’ by using copyright material without payment. However, this copyright protection also costs society by limiting access to information. Copyright owners have a financial incentive to restrict the dissemination of their works and hamper the creation of new works. This conflict necessitates a trade off, striking a balance between the competing interests of copyright owners and copyright users. Copyright law aims to achieve this balance by limiting the scope and strength of copyright protection through the duration of its grant, the rights granted, exemptions, and statutory licenses. |
|||
ADA members are united by the common principle that copyright laws must strike a balance between providing appropriate incentives for creativity on the one hand, and reasonable and equitable access to knowledge on the other hand. The ADA strongly advocates the need for a more appropriately weighted balance between these two competing interests. |
|||
The ADA is guided by the following principles: |
|||
* Support of balanced copyright and related laws that advance the interests of society as a whole. |
|||
* That the protection of rights must not supersede the wider public interest in the advancement of learning, innovation, research and knowledge. |
|||
* Support of appropriate and flexible compulsory licensing schemes and licenses that ensure guaranteed access for fair payment. |
|||
* Support of clear limitations in liability for copyright infringement that are set in circumstances where compliance cannot be practically or reasonably enforced. |
|||
* That the fundamental principle of copyright protection extends to expressions and does not cover facts, ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts. |
|||
* Opposition to laws that would give rights holders the power to use technological or contractual measures to distort the balance of rights set out in the copyright law. |
|||
== Recent Achievements == |
|||
The ADA plays an important role in strongly advocating for balanced copyright law. The last year saw a number of significant copyright developments, including the release of key copyright reviews by government, and the IceTV v Nine Network copyright case – which went all the way to the [[High Court of Australia]]. The ADA positioned itself as a key player in these developments. |
|||
=== IceTV and Nine Network === |
|||
[[Nine Network]] sued [http://www.icetv.com.au/ IceTV] for copyright infringement after IceTV used parts of Nine Network’s programme schedules for its electronic program guide. The case raised questions about the threshold of the originality requirement for copyright, and the nature of the protection for compilations (collections of facts) in Australia. |
|||
The ADA was granted leave by the [[High Court of Australia]] to intervene as a '[[Amicus curiae|friend of the court]]'. The ADA’s submissions outlined the importance of public interest considerations and the implications that this case could have on copyright users. |
|||
The High Court found in favour of IceTV, with the joint judgment of [[William Gummow|Gummow]], [[Kenneth Hayne|Hayne]] and [[Dyson Heydon|Heydon]] making explicit reference to the ADA’s submissions.<ref>[http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2009/14.html ''IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited'' <nowiki>[2009]</nowiki> HCA 14].</ref> The decision is a real win for copyright users and the public interest. Further, it highlights the ADA’s crucial role as a proponent of a balanced approach to copyright. The High Court recognised the importance of maintaining a robust public domain which allows people and organisations to use, re-use and build on materials to produce innovative new works. |
|||
=== A User’s Guide to the Flexible Dealing Provision === |
|||
Together with the ALCC, the ADA produced a handbook on the new flexible dealing provision of the [[Australian copyright law|Copyright Act]] (Section 200AB). It was written by the then Copyright Adviser, Laura Simes. The handbook outlines how the provision operates and provides a wide range of examples showing how the provision can be used by libraries, archives, galleries and educational institutions. The handbook was produced to assist members in taking advantage of the new provision. |
|||
The formal launch of the handbook was attended by ADA members, senior representatives of government departments, and other copyright figures. |
|||
The ADA capitalised on the interest generated by the launch to pursue its agenda and discuss upcoming developments and priorities in the field of copyright law and policy. |
|||
The [http://www.digital.org.au/documents/FlexibleDealingHandbookfinal.pdf flexible dealing hanbook] is available for free download under [[Creative Commons]] license. |
|||
=== Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement === |
|||
Significantly increased intermediary responsibility, among other things, is currently the subject of negotiations in the proposed [[Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement]] ('''ACTA'''). The ADA encouraged greater transparency by the [[Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade]] ('''DFAT''') regarding the progress of its negotiations. Concerns were raised about the treaty’s possible content, such as increased customs search powers, increased penalties for IP infringement, and lack of due process. The ADA formed a coalition with other concerned organisations including the Internet Industry Association, Choice, Google and the Australian Library and Information Association. |
|||
The coalition was involved in a number of government meetings, and a submitted a joint statement of [http://www.digital.org.au/submission/documents/PrinciplesforACTAnegotiations.pdf Principles for ACTA Negotiations] to DFAT. |
|||
=== Submissions === |
|||
The ADA also made a number of submissions and influenced the direction taken by government decision makers. Of particular note are submissions to the: |
|||
* [[Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy]] in response to the consultation paper: ''Australia's Digital Economy: Future Directions''.<ref>[http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/word_doc/0007/112300/Australian_Digital_Alliance_ADA.doc ADA submission - Australia's Digital Economy: Future Directions].</ref> |
|||
* [[Productivity Commission]] in response to the issues paper: ''Copyright Restrictions on the Parallel Importation of Books''.<ref>[http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/85886/sub252.pdf ADA, ALCC, ALIA joint submission - Parallel Importation].</ref> |
|||
* [[Australia 2020 Summit]], under three topics: ''Education, the Economy and Creativity''.<ref>[http://www.digital.org.au/submission/documents/Aus2020_Education.pdf ADA submission - 2020 Summit - Education]; [http://www.digital.org.au/submission/documents/Aus2020_Economy.pdf ADA submission - 2020 Summit - Economy]; [http://www.digital.org.au/submission/documents/Aus2020_Creative.pdf ADA submission - 2020 Summit - Creativity].</ref> |
|||
* [[Attorney-General's Department (Australia)|Attorney-General’s Department]] in response the issues paper: ''Copying Photographs and Films in a Different Format for Private Use''.<ref>[http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/(CFD7369FCAE9B8F32F341DBE097801FF)~Australian+Digital+Alliance+-+Submission.PDF/$file/Australian+Digital+Alliance+-+Submission.PDF ADA submission - Copying for private use].</ref> |
|||
==External links== |
|||
* [http://www.digital.org.au/index.htm Australian Digital Alliance] |
|||
* [http://www.digital.org.au/alcc/ Australian Libraries Copyright Committee] |
|||
* [http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/future_directions_of_the_digital_economy/australias_digital_economy_future_directions Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy - Australia's Digital Economy: Future Directions] |
|||
* [http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/books Productivity Commission - Copyright Restrictions on the Parallel Importation of Books] |
|||
* [http://australia2020.gov.au/final_report/index.cfm Australian Government - Australia 2020 Summit] |
|||
* [http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Copyright_IssuesandReviews_Copyingphotosandfilmsforprivateuse Attorney-General's Department - Copying Photographs and Films in a Different Format for Private Use] |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||