Del.icio.us

Maybe useful...


Buys me games...

« Wise words from Paul Boutin | Main | Sony finally wakes up to homebrew and modding »

May 16, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515f7269e200d834c0255b69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Australians can only watch recordings once. Once, mind!:

Comments

Cris

Now i understand all the BBQs and XXXX. Cos TV in Oz suxxors.

If my friend had told me this, i would not have believed them and i would have bet money he's wrong. Disgusting.

Next they'll ban taking photos and videos of parties or other events, citing that you "should have enjoyed it the first time round"

Meh

tom

Well, they can now watch things once by law. As opposed to over here, where I can't even tape a CD I own.

Legally.

But that doesn't stop me. It's just now it's more defensible under Australian law. I must admit that I'm only aware of the music recording law, and that televisual matter might be different, but I don't see why they should be. It's still the same problem.

The fact that Australian law no longer outlaws it entirely is a small step of progress, to be honest. And now, back to ripping CDs that I already paid for.

Bill

You know, for what once was a penal colony, these Aussies sure are law happy!

Bill

Melody

If you look at this from the perspective of litigation this is actually a win for consumers. It removes the possession clause that was previously considered an illegal act with recorded material. The way this law works, if you have your recording seized, the owness will be on the opposing legal team to prove you have watched this material, which is virtually impossible.

The industry professionals on the other hand, get to tell their clients "don't worry, they're only allowed to view it once."

If this one time viewing clause is what ultimately passed this law it was worth it, because it's a functionally meaningless restriction. You now get to posses recorded, copyrighted material. That's the value and purpose of this law, however disguised to people in opposition of the technology.

Bill

Good point, but I believe where this becomes an issue isn't in civil or criminal litigation, but rather where it legitimizes technologies which digitally enforce the one-viewing restriction.

I, for one, do not need TV as much as TV needs me.

Bill

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment