Does the Telecommunications Consumer Protections (TCP) Code was submitted to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) provide adequate community safeguards?

One of the most significant aspects concerning telecommunications contracts is that Australian consumers might end up finding it difficult to provide fully informed consent. This is especially the case considering that for the most part, consumers are not made aware of the products that they are to expect and end up signing contracts out of certain expectations. While this may be the case, it is important that the ACMA come to understand informed consent from the perspective of consumers because this is one of the most important ways through which it can be able to advance their interests. Because most consumers tend to end up giving consent as a result of their not being given any other choice, they are not often satisfied with the services that they are provided. Therefore, when it comes to telecommunications contracts, it is important that they be involved throughout the process of finding out what they are to expect so that when the time comes for them to give their consent, they do so in a manner that ensures their satisfaction. Therefore, the TCP is an important code because it ensures that consumers are consulted when before contracts that are in their interests are formulated. Furthermore, it is as a result of its seeking to advance consumer interests that it has sought to find out the opinions that consumers have concerning telecommunication contracts. Moreover, this report is important because it seeks to advance the idea that consumers should be able to access information on these contracts in a timely manner so that they can make a decision concerning what they believe is their best option.

One of the most important aspects of the report is that it seeks to promote the independence of consumers especially when it comes to taking responsibility for protecting themselves. Additionally, it is essential that consumers be provided with greater independence when it comes to cases where there are substantial finances involved in addition to when detailed information is required of the individuals as well as when the company offering the contract is not well known. In this way, it became possible to make sure that there is the advancement of the interests of consumers through their being provided with the information that they believe is essential before making a decision concerning providing their consent on telecommunication contracts. Because telecommunication contracts tend to be among the ones that most commonly demand that consumers provide consent, it was found to be essential that consumers be given an opportunity to ensure that they were able to advance their own interests through having enough knowledge concerning the contract itself and the services that they were to expect before making a decision concerning whether or not to provide their consent. One of the most fundamental aspects of the report is that it identifies that Australians are constantly aware of the risks that are involved in providing consent under any circumstances and it is for this reason that it has become essential for them to make sure that they are able to have a level of control over the consent that they are providing through having all information concerning the product to which they are consenting.

Thus, while informed consent is important for advancing the interests of consumers, the report identified that most telecommunications companies tend not to provide full information to consumers. This is one of the reasons why consumers end up giving their consent in contracts and receiving a lower standard of services than expected. Furthermore, there was recognition that consumers tended not to consider all information provided before giving their consent and this was found to be essentially difficult for a number of them especially when they ended up not receiving the services that they expected. The laxity among both consumers and telecommunications companies concerning information before consumer consent lay at the root of the problem. Therefore, the report recommends that consumers be provided with all the information that they need while at the same time promoting the ability of the latter to ensure that they take all information that they are provided seriously before providing their consent. This report is, therefore, important in the advancement of consumer interests especially considering that it allows for an analysis of consumer behavior and the motivations behind their giving of consent when it comes to telecommunications contracts. In this way, the ACMA will be able to have a more advanced understanding of consent issues when dealing with them in future while at the same time being able to provide advice to stakeholders on the expectations of consumers.

The Australian Government should implement the recommendation made in the House of Representatives Committee report, At What Cost? IT pricing and the Australia tax to amend the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), to make clear that it is not an infringement for consumers to circumvent geoblocking technology

One of the most controversial issues to affect Australians in the contemporary world is that of copyright owners’ use of geoblocking technology to withhold some of their content. As a result, it is important that Australia take the necessary steps to ensure that its people have the right to dodge content geoblocking as a means of making sure that they have the best quality of content possible. Furthermore, this action should be enshrined in Australian laws so that it is possible for Australians to actively undertake dodging of content geoblocking whenever they feel that they can attain a better quality of the same product elsewhere. One of the many targets for dodging is the geoblocking technology that is used by copyright owners for the purpose of segmenting the internet. The result is that Australians end up being offered a lower level of digital service for a higher price than would normally be the case in situations where the same content is sold in overseas markets. This should be a matter of concern especially considering that this technology ends up treating Australians unfairly despite their paying a higher price for the digital content that they would like to enjoy. Therefore, as the defender of the right of Australians to achieve the best quality of digital services possible, it has become essential for the government to make sure that it promotes the achievement of these services through legalizing geoblocking dodging as a right for its citizens. The result would be greater freedoms among citizens to make sure that they are able to dodge geoblocking technology without fear of legal consequences.

Currently, a significant number of consumers have come to make use of technology that allows them to circumvent geoblocks as a means of promoting their acquisition of the best digital content possible. Furthermore, their use of DNS and VPN technologies has allowed for the advancement of the interests of Australians because they have been able to acquire content that would otherwise be normally be blocked to them as a result of geoblocking technology. This is highly significant because it makes it possible for citizens to pay a fair price for full, high quality content that makes it possible for them to enjoy and make use of it as they see fit. Therefore, the government should make sure that it avoids any crackdowns on geoblock circumventing technology because to do so would mean that the government is a player in denying citizens their right to fairly priced digital content. The practice of circumventing geoblocking should be enshrined in law so that the right of Australians to full, high quality content can be upheld while at the same time discouraging practices of geoblocking that have proven to be ineffective in promoting the rights of users. Geoblocking is an infringement on user rights and the Australian government should take steps to prevent future rights owners to take advantage of the ambiguous Australian copyright system that might end up leading to a situation where consumers are unfairly taken advantage of through the use of geoblocking technology. Thus, the legalization of geoblocking technology should be made into law as a means of discouraging unscrupulous copyright owners.

As a result of these circumstances, and in the interest of the pubic, it is important that the Australian government take action to ensure that there is the implementation of the recommendations made in the report At What Cost? IT pricing and the Australia tax to amend the Copyright Act 1968 in order to make Australians realize that it is not a crime for them to circumvent geoblocking technology. This is especially the case considering that it is important for the government to make sure that it does not get entangled in international agreements that would prevent its citizens from accessing digital content of the highest quality at fair prices. There should be a realization that it is better to allow content to be easily accessed because it is the only way through which to ensure that there is a reduction in the number of copyright infringements while at the same time promoting the rights of owners to benefit from their creations. Crackdowns on circumvention of geoblocking technology only works towards encouraging piracy to such an extent that it might end up making this problem even worse. Thus, the legalization of geododging by the government would be a sure way of making sure that there is control to piracy while at the same time safeguarding the public interest.

Do the current statutory media control and diversity rules in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth) (“BSA”) serve the public interest in today’s media environment?

One of the most fundamental aspects of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 is that it seeks to promote a situation where the Australian media is regulated significantly for the purpose of safeguarding the national broadcasting environment. This bill is essential for in serving the public interest because it provides the necessary allowances and regulations to the type of material that broadcasters can provide for public consumption. One of the most significant aspects of this bill is that it promotes the removal of genre restrictions that would otherwise have hindered the advancement of the Australian media to suit the interests of those individuals in society who would like greater diversity in their programming. Furthermore, in the interests of the public, this bill is also important because it allows commercial broadcasters to have a greater opportunity for multichannelling, which they were previously not allowed to have. This is a significant step because the public has an opportunity to have a wide range of channels to view outside those that are dominated by national broadcasters; meaning that there is a wider variety of information that they can access outside those that are essentially censored by the state. In the contemporary media world, it is a significant step especially considering that a growing number of individuals are developing special interests which can be fulfilled to a greater extent through the presence of more specialized channels whose content that can view and enjoy.

The rapidly advancing media world means that there is need to ensure that the interests of local media are safeguarded and the BSA is an essential aspect of this endeavor. This is mainly because it is through the advancement of commercial media services that it will be possible for locally made content to remain dominant in the market especially considering that there is massive competition from media from other countries, especially the United States. The influence of foreign media can, therefore, be contained through this bill because, while it does not provide any significant restrictions on foreign media, it allows for privately owned local media outlets to ensure that they have a greater share of the market. This is extremely important especially considering that it is through the willingness of the BSA to allow for a reduction in the influence of national broadcasters that it is possible to bring about the competition that is needed to make sure that there is a significant improvement in the quality of programming that is provided locally. Healthy competition in media is a necessary aspect of contemporary society because it makes it possible for broadcasters to make sure that they are able to better connect with their audiences in a bid to find out their interests and work towards the development of content that is closely linked to these interests. The ability of broadcasters to bring about greater diversity is, therefore, safeguarded within this bill because it helps to advance the interests of local broadcasters when it comes to a higher quality of programming while at the same time creating the diversity that is needed to ensure that most of the population in the country is able to receive content that is in line with its interests.

This bill is also essential in the development of an environment where, while commercial broadcasters are provided with greater freedom to operate, those with the potential of promoting content that is harmful to the public will be restricted. Such a situation would make sure that commercial broadcasters have a greater responsibility towards their audiences when it comes to their content. Moreover, through this step, it will be possible for the government to make sure that media content that might prove to be a threat to the public, such as channels that advance the cause of terrorism organizations, are kept out of the public sphere; allowing Australians to live their lives as freely as possible. The need to regulate commercial broadcasters is in the public interest and this can best be done through restriction to the allocation of licenses, as stated in the bill. The BSA provides for greater involvement of the government when it comes to the allocation of broadcasting licenses, with the minister taking a direct hand when it comes to content that might be contrary to the interests of the public. In this way, it will be possible to make sure that the regulation of content in media remains constant while at the same time providing for the advancement of local content in media that promote the Australian way of life.