re: response to the final report of the productivity ... · re: response to the final report of the...

DepartmentofIndustry,InnovationandScienceIP.PCInquiry@industry.gov.au14February2017Re:responsetotheFinalReportoftheProductivityCommissionInquiryintoIntellectualPropertyArrangements.TheNationalAssociationfortheVisualArts(NAVA)thankstheGovernmentfortheopportunitytocommentontheFinalReportoftheProductivityCommissiononIntellectualPropertyArrangements.NAVAisthepeakbodyrepresentingtheprofessionalinterestsoftheAustralianvisualandmediaarts,craftanddesignsector.Itisamembershiporganisationwitharound3,500individualandorganisationalmembersand15,000subscribers.Sinceitsestablishmentin1983,NAVAhasbeeninfluentialinbringingaboutpolicyandlegislativechangetoencouragethegrowthanddevelopmentofthevisualartssectorandtoincreaseprofessionalismwithintheindustry.NAVAprovidesadvocacyandrepresentationforthesectorandsetsindustrystandards.Ithasacommitmenttoensuringcopyrightentitlementsforvisualcreatorsandwasresponsiblefortheestablishmentin1995ofViscopythevisualartscopyrightcollectingagencyforAustralia.NAVAalsowasavigorousadvocatefortheintroductionofbothmoralrightsandresaleroyaltyrightslegislationinAustralia.BriefsummaryofNAVA’srecommendations:

- anychangestoCopyrightlawmustensureartisticcreators’workisrespectedandadequatelyremuneratedwhentheirartworksareusedbyothers;

- makechangestotheexistingfairdealingsregimeratherthanreplacingitwith‘fairuse’.Theseshouldincludechangestothelawasitrelatesto:publicart;incidentalinclusionofanartworkinafilm;Indigenousart;transformativeuse;protectionofartists’moralrights;extendingcopyrighttocoverregistereddesigns;andregulationofthirdpartycommodificationofusergeneratedremixcontent;

- harnesstheopportunitiesbeingopenedupbytechnologicaldevelopmentandapplyingindustry-ledlicensingsystems;

- makechangestointermediaryliabilityandprovideabetterfunctioningsafeharbourregime;

- ifstatutorylicencefeesforeducationandgovernmentusersareremoved,Governmentmustmakeupthefullfinancialshortfall;

- ensureindividualcreatorscangainaccesstojustice;- ifchangesaretobemadetoAustralia’sIParrangements,Governmentshould

provideresourceforacommunityeducationcampaign.

2

CopyrightPrincipleNAVAhassubmittedmanydocumentsduringthecourseofsuccessivegovernments’considerationofwhatchangesmightbeneededtotheCopyrightAct.Thesehavebeenbasedonsurveysofoursectorandtheevidenceofwhathappensinpractice,demonstratedintherequestswegetforadviceandassistanceindisputesinwhichweareaskedtoactasmediators.Oftheestimated4,000requestsforadvicereceivedbyNAVAeachyear,approximately13%areaboutcopyrightandmanyarefromartistsaskinghowtodealwithbreachesoftheirrights.NAVA’sprimaryconcernwithcopyrightistoensurethatthevisualartscreatorsofintellectualpropertyareappropriatelyprotectedandremuneratedwhentheirartworksareusedbyothers.OnbehalfofAustralianvisualartists,NAVAhascontinuedtoassertthatlegislationmustensureartistscanhavesustainablecareers,includingthroughearningincomefromcopyrightpayments.Thismeansthatartistsshouldhavedecisionmakingpoweraboutbywhomandunderwhatcircumstancestheirworkcanbereproducedandforwhatreturn.NAVAwishestoacknowledgethattheProductivityCommissionfacesachallengeintryingtoaddressthecomplexitiesoftheexistingCopyrightregime,andunderstandstheneedforthelegislationtonotunreasonablyimpedeaccessbyusersandcreatorsthemselvestoinformationandideas.However,wehaveseriousreservationsabouttheprinciplesandattitudescontainedintheCommission’sinquiryreportwhichundulyprivilegestheinterestsofusersoverthecreatorsofcontent.

Despitethebroad-scaledissatisfactionexpressedbytheartsindustrywiththeearlierversionsoftheCommission’sreportanditsrecommendations,verylittlehasbeenmodified.TheReportcontinuestoproposeintroductionoftheflawedandpotentiallyverydamaging‘fairuse’regimeandgivesperfunctorytreatmenttosignificantissuesraisedbytheindustrysuchastheneedforprotectionofmoralrightsandIndigenousrights.ReprehensibleisthecontemptanddisregarddemonstratedbythisreportforthevalueofwhatiscontributedbyartiststothepublicgoodandtheAustralianeconomyandtheimportanceofensuringtheseartisticcreatorsareabletohavesustainablelongtermcareers.Indeed,thecopyrightindustryandAustralia’sculturallifearedependentonit.Inprinciple,NAVAsupportsthepropositionthatcultureisapublicresourcethatshouldbefreelyavailableforotherstoaccess,alterorbuildupon.However,wealsomaintainthatthisneedstobebalancedagainsttherightsofcreatorstohavetheirworkandtheirprofessionalreputationrespectedandtoearnincomeiftheywishfromcommercialuseoradaptationoftheirworkbyothers.NAVAbelievesthatAustralia’scurrentsystemofexceptionsandstatutorylicences,ifappliedandmonitoredrigorously,wouldbeafairbalancebetweentheinterestsofcreatorsandusersincludingwithinthedigitalenvironment.Itrespectsthefundamentalprincipleoftherightofacreatortobenefitfromtheirinvestmentintheircreationofthought,time,skillandresources.

3

ProposedChangesHowever,NAVAproposesthatthecopyrightlawneedsthefollowingmodifications:

• thereisanexceptionloopholethatneedstobeclosedinrelationtopublicartiesections65and68shouldberepealed;

• section67needstoberepealedwhichallowsthe‘incidental’inclusionofanartworkinafilm,andalsosection68whichallowsthefilmtobeshownandbroadcast;

• newsuigenerislegislationisrequiredtodealwiththecomplexitiesofthecopyrightprincipleasitshouldapplytoIndigenousart

• copyrightshouldsubsistinvisualandmediaart,craftanddesignworksregardlessofwhetherornottheseworksareregistereddesigns

• inrelationtotransformativeusebyotherartists,NAVAcontendsthatanew‘non-commercialpersonal-use’exceptionshouldbedevelopedwhichconsiders:o degreeofappropriation;o whetheritisreusingartisticconcept,subjectmatterorstyleo howmanyworksareused;o whethertheoriginalcreatorisattributedorwouldprefernottobe;ando whetherthereusecouldcausedamagetotheoriginator’sreputationby

reflectingadverselyontheintegrityoftheoriginalworkorbeingmistakenlythoughttobealesserworkbythecreatoroftheoriginal.

AdaptiveReuseArtistshavealwaysdrawnontheinspirationoftheirpredecessorsandpeersandasserttheneedsforthiskindofartisticfreedom.Currently,artistswhouseadaptiveprocessessupporttheintroductionofa‘non-commercialpersonal-use’exemption,althoughtheyacknowledgetherearesignificantchallengesindefiningnon-commercialusage.Theyalsoproposetheneedforregulationofthirdpartycommodificationofusergeneratedremixcontent.DesignProtectionUnderthecurrentAustralianintellectualproperty(IP)laws,unlikeforworksof‘fineart’,creatorsofappliedartobjectsthatareproducedinquantityaregenerallynotentitledtocopyrightprotection,andareleftvulnerabletoblatantcopyingunlesstheyapplyfordesignprotection.Insubmissionstopreviousgovernmentreviews,NAVAhascalledforchanges.In2015,theGovernment’sAdvisoryCouncilonIntellectualProperty(ACIP)calledforresponsestoitsOptionsPaper‘ReviewoftheDesignsSystem’.Thenin2016,theProductivityCommissionaskedforsubmissionsinresponsetoits‘IntellectualPropertyArrangementsDraftReport.ThereportsbothrecognisethattherearesomeflawsinAustralia’sIParrangementsbutfailtosuggestadequateviablealternatives,suchasextendingthetermofprotectionorcreatingunregistereddesignrights.Initssubmissionstobothoftheseinquiries,NAVArecommendedthechangeswebelievearerequiredtosupportaflourishingAustraliancraftanddesignsector,inparticulartoprotectcraftpractitionersandindustrial,fashion,furnitureandlightingdesigners.

4

Australiandesignersareseeinglocalandoverseasreplicasoftheirworkbeingsoldfromwhichtheyearnnothing.ThisstymiesthebuildingofviableAustraliancraftanddesignbusinesses.Therefore,NAVAcontendsthatcopyrightshouldsubsistinvisualandmediaart,craftanddesignworksregardlessofwhetherornottheseworksareregistereddesigns.PolicyCoherenceNAVAassertsthattheGovernment’spoliciesshouldhavecoherenceandconsistency.SubmissionhaverecentlyclosedfortheGovernment’s‘Inquiryintoinnovationandcreativity:workforcefortheneweconomy’whichfocusesinparticularonhowAustralia’stertiarysystemcanmeettheneedsofafuturelabourforcefocusedoninnovationandcreativity.Withartistsbeingthepre-eminentexemplarsofapplyingcreativityintheirworkandspearheadinginnovation,surelythereneedstobecoherenceinpolicieswhichenablethiscreativityandinnovationtobeappropriatelyencouragedandrewardedinpractice.HarnessTechnologyTothisend,NAVAcontinuestoassertthefundamentalprinciplethatthecopyrightsystemshouldfocusonstreamliningcopyrightandsharingofcontentonfairtermsinparticular,ensuringfaircompensationtocreators.Ratherthanradicallychangingthelegislativeframework,NAVAbelievesthatthebestwaytoshapethesysteminfutureistoharnesstheopportunitiesbeingopenedupbytechnologicaldevelopmentandapplyingindustry-ledlicensingsystems.Asanexample,themostimportantoutcomeofthe2011UKcopyrightreviewistheadoptionoftheCopyrightHub,asystemofopensourcetechnologytoenabletheonlinelicensing,forpayment(orfreeinsomecases),forhighvolumelowvaluetransactions.SupportedbytheUKgovernment,itisnowalsoreceivingseriousattentionfromtheUSgovernmentasitreviewsitsownlegislativeandoperationalarrangements.Australiashouldlearnfromboththeinnovationandavoidthemistakesofothercountries.Ratherthanyieldingtothepressurefrommultinationalcompaniesthattradeontheirpowertoappropriateothers’IP,weencouragetheGovernmenttoexplorewaysofimprovingIPenforcement,suchaschangestointermediaryliabilityandensuringabetterfunctioningsafeharbourregime.FairUsevsFairDealingAshasbeenrepeatedlyassertedinprevioussubmissions,the‘fairuse’regimechangesthebalanceofpowerundulyinfavourofthosewishingtofinanciallyexploittheeffortofcreatorswithoutregardtotheirrighttobenefitfromtheirowncreation.Australia’scurrentfairdealingregimehasevolvedovertimetoprovideexceptionsasneedsariseandcanbejustified.Thismakesthetermsofusereasonablyclear,enablingfreeaccessunderagreedcircumstanceswhereexceptionsexist.Itestablishesspecificparametersforexceptiontotheruleratherthanrelyingoninterpretationbycourtsofthevagueterm‘fairuse’.AshasbeendemonstratedintheUS,afairuseregimeleadstocontradictoryjudgmentsbeingmadeandresultsinalackofcertaintyonallsides.Almostinvariablyitisthecreatorswholoseoutbecausetheydonothavetheresourcestopursuetheinfringersthroughthelegalsystems.

5

StatutoryLicenceFeesTheProductivityCommissionproposedanendtothepracticewhereeducationandgovernmentuserspaystatutorylicencefeesforonlinematerial.Asubstantialproportionoftheproposedsavingof$18millionperannumtotaxpayersiswhatiscurrentlygoingtoremuneratethecreatorsoftheIPbeingcopied.ThereisnoproposalbytheProductivityCommissiontofindasubstituteforthisessentialsourceofincomeforcreators.IttheGovernmentwishestoremovethisresponsibilityfromeducationandgovernmentusers,itisessentialthattheshortfallbemadeupbygovernmentthroughsomeothermeanstoensurecontinuationofsupportforAustraliancreativityandinnovation.AccesstoJusticeInenforcingadherencetofairdealingincopyright,akeyelementistoenableindividualcreatorstogainaccesstojustice.Usuallythesituationisonewhereanartististryingtoasserttheirrightsagainstexploitationbymajorcommercialinterestswithinfinitelygreaterpowerandresources.LiketheAustralianCopyrightCouncil,wesupporttheCommission’srecommendationsinrelationtotheFederalCircuitCourt.WealsourgetheGovernmenttoconsiderothermeasures,suchasaneffectivenoticeandtakedown(orstaydown)regime.CommunityEducationFinally,weproposethatifchangesaretobemadetoAustralia’sIParrangements,theGovernmentshouldprovideresourceforacommunityeducationcampaignandtherunningoftestcasestoestablishtheboundariesofanynewlegalparameters.WerespectfullyrequestthattheGovernmentensuresthatCopyrightlegislationshouldrequirethatvisualcreatorsaregiventhevaluing,protectionandrewardtheydeserveasmajorcontributorstoAustralianinnovation,economy,socialandculturalwellbeingandinternationaldiplomacyandtrade.Theintroductionof‘fairuse’risksvisualartistsbeingmadeevenmorethevictimsofunfairuse.

TamaraWinikoffOAMExecutiveDirector