The amendments to the Australian Copyright law have themselves been amended and re-submitted. Failing some extraordinary event, they will become law in January 2007.

The reservations of many groups about some aspects of the new bill were at least partly appeased with the changes. Most of these seemed to be with the on-the-spot penalties for non-commercial copyright infringements, which appear to have been removed.

Attorney General Philip Ruddock has posted an FAQ about the new bill, which addresses some of the concerns. Two interesting points on that page:

Is it an offence for a 14 year old to record himself or herself lip-synching a pop song and post it on the Internet?

Recording yourself lip-synching a pop song may mean that you are making an unauthorised copy of the sound recording. However, posting the recording on the Internet will not in itself constitute a criminal offence.

If the recording is posted for the purposes of trade, it may amount to a criminal offence and be subject to an on-the-spot fine.
Recording television and radio for a later time (‘time shifting’)

…

Does this mean I can keep a library of copied television and radio programs?

No. There is an important difference between ‘librarying’ and ‘time-shift’ recording. Librarying is building up a collection to keep indefinitely for repeated use while time-shifting is recording a broadcast at a time when the person can’t view it so it can be watched at a later time. A time-shift copy can’t be kept permanently for repeated use. However, DVDs and sound recordings of popular broadcasts are increasingly available for purchase.

The first point there is a definite positive. It basically means that while using copyright material for broadcast is not legal, there isn’t going to be an offense associated with it, as long as it’s not for commercial purposes. This does raise the question of embedding your YouTube videos in your blog when you have Google AdSense ads (or something similar) showing. Would that be considered commercial? Is there some sort of minimum income required, or does the fact that the income isn’t covered by Australian taxation law mean it isn’t considered commercial here. But does the AUSFTA mean that it might be covered under US law (as Google is a US company). These are questions that will need addressing in the not-too-distant future.

The other point, about librarying (is that even a word?) is still ridiculous. I can record off the TV, but I can’t keep it. So I can only watch it once, and then lend it to a family member, who can only watch it once. What if I walk into the room while they’re watching it, have I just committed a crime? And what do I have to do with the disk once everyone in my household has watched it, throw it out? At least a VHS tape can be re-recorded, but most DVDs are still single use. In this age of environmental awareness, is the government enacting a law that will require everyone to start filling their bins with TV recorded DVDs? (Yeah, OK that was a cheap shot, I know).

The point is, why can’t I watch the shows I record more than once? Is it because that then competes with DVD box set sales? Because I don’t know about anyone else, but I buy them more for the extras, the better quality & the lack of ads. If I just wanted the show, I would have recorded it in the first place (stop, thief!)

Don’t get me wrong, I think this legislation is mostly a step in the right direction, I just think the law still has some significant catching up to do before it’s actually able to cope with the new generation of entertainment & communication technology.