Tuesday, 1 March 2011
I noted the other day that the Attorney-General had set out the upcoming copyright reform agenda.
And then an email alert crossed my desk – an actual copyright reform, in a dedicated Bill. Australia is to get a new copyright exception! Specifically, we are to get new s 44BA, for ‘acts done in relation to certain medicine’. It’s basically an exception to allow generic medicines producers to use the officially approved “Product Information Document” originally submitted when new drugs are approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. The background to this amendment, according to the Explanatory Memorandum, is apparently this case, in which an originator pharmaceutical company got an interlocutory injunction, partly on the basis of an argument that copyright in the approved product information document would be infringed by the competitor’s use of the approved PI for its generic medicine.
This strikes me as perhaps one of the clearest arguments I’ve seen in a while for a fair use exception or other flexible exception in Australia. The very idea that someone has had to draft, and now the legislature has to pass, legislation to add this specific exception in is a clear indication that there just isn’t enough flexibility in the legislation. Is it just me?
One Response to “Building the case for fair use in Australia – one specific exception at a time”
Leave a Reply
Do not post material that is defamatory or obscene, that infringes any third party's copyrights, trademarks or other proprietary rights, or that violates any other right of any other person.
We reserve the right to remove or edit any comment for any reason.
Note: Posting more than two links in a comment may cause it not to appear because it will be submitted for moderation. Also, links in comments will not be counted by Google, so spamming is pointless.
March 1st, 2011 at 4:30 pm
While the fact such an exception is needed is a little silly, at least they’re doing *something* positive in response to that ruling. I’m still annoyed about our involvement in the ACTA debacle (and the content-free response I got from my local member about it), as well as the dodgy laws we imported via the US “free” trade agreement.
P.S. I neglected to say “yay for more LawFont articles” when new stuff started turning up in the RSS feed in December. With the feed quiet for so long, I was reverting to my old status of knowing more about what was going in US IP law than I did about Australian law.