More free trade agreement dramas. Apparently, the Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement requires overturning the iiTrial in order to be implemented! Joy!
Australia-Korea FTA NIA asserts High Ct decision in Roadshow v iiNet is inconsistent with Australia-US FTA. Really? http://t.co/NfztJn4B7L
— Kimberlee Weatherall (@kim_weatherall) June 11, 2014
This tweet was concerning enough as it is, so I dug into the “National Interest Assessment” itself and found the gem on point 17:
Consistent with Australia’s existing obligations in the Australia-US and Australia-Singapore FTAs, and to fully implement its obligations under KAFTA, the Copyright Act 1968 will require amendment in due course to provide a legal incentive for online service providers to cooperate with copyright owners in preventing infringement due to the High Court’s decision in Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd, which found that ISPs are not liable for authorising the infringements of subscribers.
I’ve shot off FOI requests to AGD, DFAT and IP Australia. There’s a JSCOT sitting on Monday, so hopefully someone will grill them on this absolute travesty.
This explains at least partially why Senator Brandis is so interested in implementing a graduated response and Internet censorship regime in Australia. The mess just keeps getting worse. Let’s not forget the Productivity Commission very explicitly stated that IP changes should not be considered in FTAs without proper analysis of the consequences.
If this Government can’t even handle something as straight-forward as a bilateral free trade agreement without it requiring major changes to our Copyright Act, how can we trust a single word they say about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement not requiring changes to our legislation?