Schedule 5 and Schedule 7 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth)

The current co-regulatory scheme established under Schedules 5 and 7 is extremely important because it promotes the idea that both government and industry have a responsibility to make sure that illegal or offensive material online is controlled. As a result, it has become essential for the industry to take responsibility in ensuring that there is more classification of content and development of classification codes. This is especially considering that there is need for the industry to promote the maintenance of the relative independence of action that it has been granted through actively seeking to bring about a level of moderation in the content that it transmits to the Australian public. The classification of content and development of classification codes is therefore an important step that can be taken by the industry because it allows for greater self-regulation as well as actions which are able to bring about a significant level of public protection from offensive material. Such an action would also be important in the achievement of transparency within the industry because it would allow it to cooperate with government in promoting the public interest while at the same time safeguarding itself from potential problems that might end up having a negative effect on its activities. It is through the active participation of industry in classification of content that the intended purpose of the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Act 1999 to strike a balance between the interests of industry and those of the wider Australian community will be achieved without any serious friction with government regulatory bodies or need for further legislative action to regulate the industry.

One of the most significant aspects of the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Act 1999 is that it seeks to block illegal and offensive material from overseas. The need to do so, while extremely important, is a task that can be considered to be difficult especially considering that for the most part, government would have to strike a balance between ensuring the freedoms of the internet and the need to protect its citizens. However, the industry can be considered to be more capable of self-censorship especially through the requirement that it ensures more classification. The major fear of such a situation is that the industry, despite its best intentions, might not be able to achieve a high level of self-censorship that would significantly prevent illegal material from reaching the Australian community. The result is that there is need to promote the advancement of legislation to enforce the industry’s role in promoting classification as a means of promoting the interests of all Australians. Without legislative pressure, it is likely that the industry will not have the incentive needed to bring about the development of faster, better, and cheaper ways of achieving the outcomes that are desired by the government for the purpose of protecting its citizens. The industry has to make sure that it creates classifications that advances the interests of citizens by enabling them to take control over the standards of content that they wish to accept in their media because that it one of the most important ways through which it will be able to bring about a level of censorship of offensive material.

Despite the need for the government to have a role in regulation through the implementation of legislation, the industry has a greater role to play. This is especially considering that the government only has jurisdiction over content that is made and distributed within Australia and has limited control over overseas content; which is often the majority of what is consumed locally. Therefore, industry has a crucial role to play in classification because it is the both a service provider as well as a beneficiary of the content that is transmitted. Moreover, it is only through the direct involvement of industry in both classification and coding that it becomes possible to ensure that there is a level of cooperation with government in securing the interests of citizens while at the same time advancing its own interests. Through the co-regulatory scheme, the industry has become an essential player in regulation and because it has greater access to content than the government, it is better placed to promote safe content to citizens. This is especially considering that through working with government, the industry will be able to create desired classifications which will enable content diversity while at the same time bringing about a high level of control over illegal content.

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.