Melbourne Law School - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 730
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableFilm Review: Four Perspectives on Hanung Bramantyo’s Kartini(Indonesian Resources and Information Program (IRIP), 2017-07)Following the Melbourne screening of Hanung Bramantyo’s new film Kartini in May 2017, the University of Melbourne’s Indonesia Forum organised a symposium on the theme ‘The film Kartini and Kartini as a source of historical and contemporary inspiration in Indonesia’. Four speakers were invited to present their responses based on their particular areas of research. Here they briefly re-present their takes on director Hanung’s latest cinematic interpretation of Indonesia’s iconic female national hero.
-
Item
-
ItemThe Responsibility to Protect: Inequities in International Aid Flows to Myanmar and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and their Impact on Maternal and Child Health(Taylor and Francis Group, 2012)The Union of Myanmar and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) are the most disadvantaged aid recipients in Asia. In this paper we describe and analyse the inequities in international aid flows to these countries from a health equity and “responsibility to protect” perspective. Review of public health and health systems literature and examination of international aid flows reveals that countries with a comparable gross national income receive total aid flows 11 to 12 times larger than do Myanmar (Burma) and DPR Korea (North Korea). Although the issue of aid effectiveness in these governance contexts remains a significant challenge, there is nonetheless a joint national and international responsibility to protect women and children through the careful targeting of health humanitarian aid and development programs.
-
ItemSocial Media and Court Communication(Sweet and Maxwell, 2015)Courts have traditionally relied on the delivery of judicial decisions as their sole means of direct communication with the general public. Over time this reliance is shifting, including through the willingness of courts to have their proceedings televised. Courts have also sought to have greater influence on how others communicate about and report their decisions, such as by employing public information officers to prepare press releases on court activities and liaise with the media. Most recently, judges and courts have taken their engagement with the public one step further by experimenting with the use of social media. Social media such as Twitter or Facebook provide a new means by which courts can enhance their openness and accessibility. However, such technologies also come with a fresh set of challenges. In particular, unlike television or media reporting, social media is designed to foster dialogue and ongoing interaction between participants. This needs to be carefully considered, as the use of social media has the potential to affect not only the processes by which courts communicate, but also the nature and substance of court proceedings. While this latter effect could be positive, injudicious use of social media could compromise a court’s ability to operate with independence and integrity. Drawing on a case study of social media use by courts in three common law jurisdictions (the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America), this paper considers the extent to which direct communication processes via social media may further the underlying objectives of court communication and enhance the courts’ constitutional role. It considers the opportunities and challenges posed by such media for courts, and how the inherent limits and constraints of social media may affect the nature of court communication. We assess the extent to which courts should make greater use of social media to enhance their existing communication processes and consider whether additional safeguards should be adopted to ensure the use of social media does not detrimentally impact upon the judicial system.
-
ItemThe P2P wars: How code beat law(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2012-05-01)
-
ItemA Bit Liable: A Guide to Navigating the US Secondary Liability Patchwork(Santa Clara University School of Law, 2008)In terms of scholarly and media attention, copyright's secondary liability doctrines long played a bit-part alongside direct liability's leading lady. But since peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing providers began facilitating billions of copyright infringements a decade ago, those unassuming doctrines have been forced into starring roles. This article shines a spotlight on U.S. secondary liability law ten years after it first took center stage, highlighting the myriad uncertainties and controversies that now plague its operation. These uncertainties are illustrated with detailed reference to the hypothetical secondary liability of BitTorrent Inc., the original and as-yet unlitigated provider of the world's most dominant P2P file-sharing tool. This work argues that the rhetoric underpinning the existing secondary liability law is strongly protective of technology, but that the breadth and depth of the uncertainties surrounding its proper application effectively abrogates those protections by stealth.
-
ItemOn the (new) New Zealand graduated response law (and why it's unlikely to achieve its aims)(Swinburne University of Technology, 2012-01-01)In 2011 New Zealand controversially introduced a 'three strikes' graduated response law. Under this law, the holders of Internet service accounts which are detected as having infringed copyright via P2P file sharing technologies three times within a specified time period can be ordered by the Copyright Tribunal to pay content owners up to NZ$15,000. The law also provides for Internet access to be suspended, though these provisions are currently inactive pending determination of the efficacy of the financial penalty regime. This paper explores the contours of the NZ graduated response regime - and then outlines a number of technical and practical reasons why it's unlikely to achieve its aims.
-
ItemWhat Can 100,000 Books Tell Us About the International Public Library e-Lending Landscape?(University of Borås, Sweden, 2019)Introduction. We investigated the relative availability of e-books to libraries for e-lending in five English-language countries & analysed their licence terms and prices. Method. We created a unique dataset recording author, publisher, price and terms for 100,000 titles and 388,045 e-lending licences across Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States and United Kingdom through the aggregator Overdrive. We developed new algorithms to estimate the original publication year for each title & to match titles across jurisdictions. Analysis. We examined the relationships between title price, age, terms, jurisdiction, publisher and publisher type using various statistical analyses and machine learning. Results. Price and licence differences across countries are largely attributable to the Big 5 publishers. Prices are largely independent of title age (unless the title is in the public domain) or the rights libraries obtain in exchange. Licence terms are not affected by age either, meaning that the most restrictive terms are often applied to older, less demanded books. Conclusions. By setting terms independent of titles' value to libraries, publishers may discourage libraries from adding older and less-demanded books to their collections. We will test this hypothesis in a follow-up library survey.
-
ItemWe (Still) Need to Talk About Aereo: New Controversies and Unresolved Questions After the Supreme Court's Decision(Columbia University Libraries and Columbia Law School, 2015)Recent judicial interpretations of U.S. copyright law have prompted businesses to design technologies in ways that enable the making and transmission of copies of works to consumers while falling outside the scope of the owner’s exclusive rights. The archetypal example was Aereo, Inc.’s system for providing online access to broadcast television. Aereo allowed users to tune into individual antennae to stream near-live TV to themselves, online. If this activity fell within the scope of the exclusive right of public performance, then it required the permission of right holders. The “Transmit Clause” of the U.S. Copyright Act’s definition of “to perform publicly” brings within the scope of the public performance right: [T]ransmitting or otherwise communicating a performance or display of the work . . . to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times. Holdings from the Second Circuit that the relevant performance was the specific transmission from each copy, and that those performances could not be public if made to only a single user, gave Aereo a blueprint for avoiding liability. It took up the invitation by designing a system incorporating thousands of dime-sized antennas. By temporarily assigning one to each user, from which she could access only the signals she could freely pick up from her own rooftop, Aereo’s service enabled individual copies to be made of each program and then transmitted on request to the user. Since each transmission was directed only to the single requesting user, Aereo argued it could not be considered made “to the public.”
-
ItemKazaa Goes the Way of Grokster? Authorisation of Copyright Infringement Via Peer-To-Peer Networks in Australia(Thomson Reuters, 2006)In Universal Music Australia v Sharman License Holdings (2005) 65 IPR 289 an Australian Federal Court suggested for the first time that it is acceptable to prohibit the continued distribution of a product on the grounds that after its sale it is capable of being used by its purchaser to infringe copyright, even though it may also have non-infringing uses. The decision, currently on appeal to the Full Court, raises important questions about the scope and meaning of the concept of “authorisation” under Australian law. The most important question is whether or not some degree or control is necessary to support a finding of authorisation. This article comprehensively explains the decision and argues that the Full Court could usefully draw upon some aspects of the United States approach to answer the questions raised.