Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 28 June 2000
Page: 18507

Mr McCLELLAND (7:20 PM) —I move:

(8) Schedule 1, item 100, page 28 (line 34) to page 29 (line 3), omit subsection (5G), substitute:

(5G) Subsections (5B) and (5C) do not apply in relation to the supply of a circumvention device or a circumvention service to a person for use for a permitted purpose if:

(a) the person is a qualified person; and

(b) the person gives the supplier before, or at the time of, the supply a declaration signed by the person:

(i) stating the name and address of the person; and

(ii) stating the basis on which the person is a qualified person; and

(iii) stating the name and address of the supplier of the circumvention device or circumvention service; and

(iv) stating that the device or service is to be used only for a permitted purpose by a qualified person; and

(v) identifying the permitted purpose by reference to one or more of sections 47D, 47E, 47F, 48A, 49, 50, 51A and 183 and Part VB; and

(vi) stating that a work or other subject-matter in relation to which the person proposes to use the device or service for a permitted purpose is not readily available to the person in a form that is not protected by a technological protection measure.

This amendment is designed to recognise directors' copyright interests in films. Currently, section 90 of the act provides that the owner of the copyright in a film is the maker of the film, which is the producer or production company. We note that the United Kingdom and a number of European jurisdictions have already recognised directors' copyright, and we believe it is appropriate to recognise that the contribution of directors should be recognised so that they are included among the group of underlying rights holders who are remunerated for the retransmission of free-to-air broadcasts. So the opposition's amendments will provide that, in relation to films, the principal director is deemed to be a joint owner of any copyright subsisting in the film, together with the person owning any such copyright under section 90 of the act.