Australians react to US-style copyright law

Readers of Aussie journalist-blogger Crikey react to the pending Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. Excerpts:

So exactly how does extending protection to 70 years after the author's death increase creativity, or increase investment in creativity, or improve the income of anybody creative? ...

One aspect of the FTA that is apparently being under reported is the commitment that Australia will align its Intellectual Property (IP) laws with the US. DFAT's website states the FTA "harmonises our intellectual property laws more closely with the largest intellectual property market in the world, which is recognised as a global leader in innovation and creative products."

The US copyright and patent laws are globally recognises as a joke, and Australia is harming itself if it follows down this path. It rewards large companies by giving them huge control, slowly eroding away the remaining fair use provisions the consumer currently has. Simple fair use rights like recording TV shows and watching them later could not only be illegal, but technologically prohibited in next generation appliances.

Time and again, new laws are introduced in USA that seem to cater for one interest group - big corporates. Be it the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, copyright extensions, or software patents - none of them are designed to benefit the consumer.

The DMCA prevents circumventing copy protection, but is interpreted so loosely that it is used to silence critics and undermine legitimate research. Countless examples exist of this at the Chilling Effects website.

The people are not happy with their trade reps.

Later: Morrie J. sends along additional links:

Ross Gittins is a well established, well credentialed economics writer who gives his take on the FTA.

And Kaaza has come out swinging.