This blog post was authored by Mozart Palmer, a spokesperson for Pirate Party Australia.

Copyright lobbyists love to use words like ‘stealing’ and ‘piracy’ to describe sharing copyrighted materials online. ‘Theft’ is another word commonly applied by these copyright protectionists to what is already a widespread practice. The expression ‘copyright theft’ is a paradox: it is impossible to take away a person’s right to copy information or ideas. ‘Theft’ is used to misinform the public, media and, most importantly, lawmakers, in order to outlaw what many see as perfectly normal behaviour.

We are taught from a very early age to share, and in the Information Age, where sharing information, ideas and culture is incredibly easy, it is only natural for people to continue to do so.

This ability is being hampered however, as groups such as the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT, whose name is ironically a paradox in itself) continue their efforts to protect the failing business models of an industry too complacent and comfortable to adapt. Whenever a new technology comes along that facilitates the dissemination of knowledge and culture on a much wider scale than before, the content industry – the copyright owners and their representatives – complain that it will destroy them.

Read More

Pirate Party Australia urges the Gillard Government not to consider any amendments to copyright law, following yesterday’s push by the heads of Australia’s biggest sporting codes for changes to the laws. The push for amendments comes little more than a week after Federal Court Justice Steven Rares ruled that Optus’ TV Now service – which allows users to record and playback free-to-air television with as little as a two minute delay – did not infringe copyright[1].

Pirate Party Australia supports the decision that the service provided is merely a progression from the ability to record television for viewing at a more convenient time.

Read More

Pirate Party Australia is aghast at the closed-door meeting facilitated by the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport, where copyright holders have made demands that search engines Google, Bing and Yahoo actively censor search results[1][2].

“The lack of transparency is frightening, and echoes the opaque negotiations led by the Attorney-General’s Department between rights holders and internet service providers in Australia last September. Coupled with the secrecy surrounding ACTA and the TPP, we are beginning to see a clear picture of deliberate circumvention of the electorate in determining their future,” said Rodney Serkowski, founder of Pirate Party Australia. “We aim to lift the veil of secrecy that surrounds governmental decision making in both Australia and the rest of the world. The meetings here and in the UK are setting dangerous standards for the continued abuse of democratic processes.”

Read More

Pirate Party Australia has decried the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

ACTA’s claimed objectives are the establishment of new global standards for enforcing intellectual property rights, including increased international co-operation to address counterfeiting and ‘piracy’. The European Union became a signatory to ACTA last Thursday, joining Australia, the United States, Singapore and others.

The European Union’s rapporteur on ACTA resigned over the Agreement last week, claiming that there has been “no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations,” and “everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable [and] its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing.”[1]

Read More

Pirate Party Australia has finished its analysis of documents released under the Freedom of Information Act, and has found evidence that former Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, supports schemes that “must be educative and aim to change social norms.”[1]

In September of 2011, the Attorney-General’s Department convened talks with internet service providers (ISPs) and representatives of the content industry (such as AFACT), to discuss progress on co-operative anti-piracy strategies. Not only does Mr McClelland promote a consumer-excluding “industry-based solution,”[2] it also appears that he was more than prepared to force social change in order to prop-up the dying content industries.

Read More