Unfair disadvantages could flow from ‘Fair Use’ proposal: US Chamber
February 9, 2017
…”Historically, Australia has been a world leader when it comes to IP legislation and is one of a small group of nations that has effective incentives to create in place, providing legal certainty to innovators investing in Australian stories, content and information in the marketplace.
“It is a balance that mobilises the creative talents of the population while also serving local and global consumers in the provision of high quality content and entertainment. That’s why the recent recommendations of the [Productivity] Commission’s report are both puzzling and alarming to myself and many other international observers.
“At a time when the earnings of creators have been in a downward spiral, the report is peppered with assertions that Australia’s copyright system favours creators at the expense of consumers and insists that Australia’s position as a ‘net importer’ of creative content means it should further dilute the existing incentives for local creators and industries. So, the report seems to say, that because a lot of American and British content is imported into the country, why not go the whole way and just forget about Australian content altogether?
I’m not sure the community within Australia or the United States would agree. When you’re producing music hits like Sia’s Chandelier and Gotya’s Somebody That I Used to Know and the film Lion – we all want more of that not less.”