Executive Summary
This issue paper identifies problems of bargaining inequality in relation to consent provisions, sections 195AW, 195AWB and 195AXJ in Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (hereafter “the Act”). The pivotal analysis in this paper is if artists’ moral rights, especially the young visual artists under age of 30 in the Queensland Youth Artists Collective, are effectively protected against the inequality under the provisions. The paper applies the theory of liberalism to examine the effectiveness of the current provisions, especially, if a purpose of the Act and a goal of the Australian government are achievable through the mechanism of the consent. In the analysis, this paper finds several problems of the provisions causing the inequality …show more content…
The moral right is, therefore, their reputations and the effective protection is essential for the works to be treated with respect. The Australian creative community including the young visual artists enables to seek legal remedies if there are any derogatory treatment in relation to their works used by others.
The consent is existed to avoid any potential infringement in using the artists’ work by the industries, such as directors, producers or dealers. The consent provisions state that a written consent allows any acts or omissions in films or works in films or performer’s right. The artists of other than films or works in films may be consented to unspecified infringement works if classes or types of the act are written. It is assumed that there will be no issue with the consent provisions if the industries use the artists’ work with respect.
The Problems with the …show more content…
In the free market economy, interruption by a government or law is only justified if it helps the society to achieve anticipated results. in Copyright Amendment (Morial Rights) Bill 1999 (Cth), the waiver is not a concept the Australian copyright law holds after the amendment. However, the consent provision is deemed to be used as the waiver in practice, and the legal mechanism discourages the visual artists to give up their moral rights rather than provides protections to the rights. These circumstances certainly describe the law is not justified to intrude as well as does not achieve the goal to protect the moral rights. To apply a true meaning of the protection under the Article, it should not permit any consent or waiver on the moral
This issue paper identifies problems of bargaining inequality in relation to consent provisions, sections 195AW, 195AWB and 195AXJ in Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (hereafter “the Act”). The pivotal analysis in this paper is if artists’ moral rights, especially the young visual artists under age of 30 in the Queensland Youth Artists Collective, are effectively protected against the inequality under the provisions. The paper applies the theory of liberalism to examine the effectiveness of the current provisions, especially, if a purpose of the Act and a goal of the Australian government are achievable through the mechanism of the consent. In the analysis, this paper finds several problems of the provisions causing the inequality …show more content…
The moral right is, therefore, their reputations and the effective protection is essential for the works to be treated with respect. The Australian creative community including the young visual artists enables to seek legal remedies if there are any derogatory treatment in relation to their works used by others.
The consent is existed to avoid any potential infringement in using the artists’ work by the industries, such as directors, producers or dealers. The consent provisions state that a written consent allows any acts or omissions in films or works in films or performer’s right. The artists of other than films or works in films may be consented to unspecified infringement works if classes or types of the act are written. It is assumed that there will be no issue with the consent provisions if the industries use the artists’ work with respect.
The Problems with the …show more content…
In the free market economy, interruption by a government or law is only justified if it helps the society to achieve anticipated results. in Copyright Amendment (Morial Rights) Bill 1999 (Cth), the waiver is not a concept the Australian copyright law holds after the amendment. However, the consent provision is deemed to be used as the waiver in practice, and the legal mechanism discourages the visual artists to give up their moral rights rather than provides protections to the rights. These circumstances certainly describe the law is not justified to intrude as well as does not achieve the goal to protect the moral rights. To apply a true meaning of the protection under the Article, it should not permit any consent or waiver on the moral