Productivity Commission recommends copyright relaxation in Australia

A draft report by the Productivity Commission states that Australia’s copyright laws are too excessive, and recommends changes be made.

It says they are “too narrow and prescriptive, do not reflect the way people actually consume and use content in the digital world and are insufficiently flexible to account for new legitimate uses of copyright material.”

The report has an issue with the fact copyright owners have protection for their life span and a further 70 years. The report asserts that this is “weighed too heavily in favour of copyright owners, to the detriment of the long-term interests of both consumers and intermediate users.”

Consumers and libraries cannot access the copyrighted works for too long, and suggests a copyright period of 25 years.

Says the Commission, “The evidence (and indeed logic) suggests that the duration of copyright protection is far more than is needed. Few, if any, creators are motivated by the promise of financial returns long after death, particularly when the commercial life of most works is less than five years.”

It also wants the Government to clarify that Australians getting around geoblocking technology to access overseas music and movie streaming services, is not illegal. It is currently a grey area, the report suggests.

“The Australian Government should make clear that it is not an infringement of Australia’s copyright system for consumers to circumvent geoblocking technology and should seek to avoid international obligations that would preclude such practices.”

The report argues consumers access overseas services because they are cheaper and have a greater choice. For instance, it cites, in January 2016, the amount of titles available on Netflix in Australia was 2092. In America it was 5760.

Geoblocking was one reason why Australians pay more for music, games, software and e-book than overseas consumers. “Fair use” would save Australian consumers $1 billion a year, the report estimates.

The Productivity Commission has called for comments on its draft report by June 3. It will deliver its final report to the Government in August. It can be read here.

The Copyright Agency, which represents the creative industries, responded to the report’s contentions as leading to “an irresponsible policy” that would “stifle Australian content” and “would pose one of the greatest dangers to Australian-made content in a generation.”

Its CEO Adam Suckling said, “A US-style ‘fair use’ exception to copyright is out of context in the Australian system and would be a wrecking ball to Australian writers, creators, publishers and the local creative industries.

“Australian consumers, educators and students should be rightly concerned that home-grown stories, local content and Australian educational works would be seriously curtailed by such an irresponsible policy.”

In February, a cost-benefit analysis by PricewaterhouseCoopers into the costs and benefits of a ‘fair use’ scheme in Australia estimated a loss of GDP of over $1 billion. It would lead to expensive litigation “and ultimately a dearth of Australian voices in the creative landscape.”

It looked at the impact of its introduction in two countries. In Singapore it was linked to a 50% decline in growth in copyright industries. In Canada the effects included the closures of a collection society and a major domestic educational publisher and the closure of a collecting society.

The PWC report was commissioned by Screenrights, APRA AMCOS, PPCA, Copyright Agency | Viscopy, Foxtel and News Corp Australia.