Australia considers fair-use provision.
The Attorney General of Australia is considering a
measure that would allow consumers to make personal copies of media they have already paid for. Currently, fair-use in Australia only allows copying for academic research or for journalistic review. By giving Australians the right to make copies of their media, the nation's consumers would enjoy similar rights as those in the U.S. Under U.S. law, people are allowed to make "non-commercial" copies of musical recordings. Taping TV shows to watch later ("time-shifting") is also legal in the U.S. but currently outlawed in Australia.
I find the article's quote from the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft rather interesting:
"Fair use is often misunderstood to mean free use. It's not fair use to allow a person in their home to make a perfect digital copy of a program for free that they would otherwise have bought from a store." So their argument is,
"We've always been able to sell you additional copies, therefore we must be allowed to continue to do so."
The AFACT's argument is flawed. Despite their claims, making a personal copy or two is not theft. When you buy a CD or DVD, you're not really paying for a tangible thing - that silver disc. What you're really paying for is the right to operate one copy of the media embodied within the disc. Copyright is based on "use" of material, not "ownership" of it. You don't
own the music or video, you've merely paid for the right to
use it. Sure, you own the disc, but you have no legal "ownership" rights to the content. You should, however, be allowed full use and enjoyment of that content. Making a copy of a CD to listen to in your car or on a portable player, or making a copy of a DVD to watch at another location hasn't created any additional benefit to the consumer, nor has it created any detriment to the copyright owner. You haven't taken anything from the copyright owner. You have created another physical copy, yet you can only listen to or watch one copy at a time. Therefore, it's still a single use by a single user; the scope of the use hasn't expanded to other users. The media is just accessible to you in more places. So-called "space-shifting."
Fair-use should enable consumers to enjoy their media in any location, and on any platform. It makes no sense (aside from the pursuit of windfall profits) why The Entertainment Cartel in Australia is so adamant in selling you multiple copies just because you want to use them in more than one location. In the U.S., the
RIAA even concedes that consumers have to right to make personal copies of their CDs:
If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail.
This should also be the case in Australia, and elsewhere. This isn't the 1920s, where we all gather around the Victrola and listen to 78s while sipping tea. Today we need our music and video to go. Around the house, in our cars, at work, etc. Copyright laws should reflect that.
Cheers.