[1] B Sterling, "Free as Air, Free as Water, Free as Knowledge" in Thinking Robots, An Aware Internet, and Cyberpunk Librarians , The 1992 LITA President's Program (R Miller & M Wolf (eds), LITA, Sept 1992).
[2] D Phan "Will Fair Use Function on the Internet" (1998) 98 Columbia Law Review 169 at 191.
[3] D Fisher "The Postmodern Paradiso: Dante: Cyberpunk and the Technosophy of Cyberspace." In D Parker, Internet Culture (Routledge, NY, London, 1997).
[4] W Anderson "Postmodernism, Pluralism, and the Crisis of Legitimacy" in Explorations in Difference: Law, Culture and Politics (R Baumann & J Hart (eds) University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Buffalo, 1996).
[5] R Coombe "Objects of Property and Subjects of Politics: Intellectual Property Laws and Democratic Dialogue" (1991) 69 Texas Law Review 1853.
[6] See Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Bill 1999; and also B Keller "Condemned to Repeat the Past: The Reemergence of Misappropriation and other Common Law Theories of Protection for Intellectual Property." (1998) 11 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 401.
[7] For a brief discussion as to what a meta site is, see B Weiss "Meta sites linked to IP violations." National Law Journal, July 21, 1997 at B9.
[8] I Nathenson "Internet Infoglut and Invisible Ink: Spamdexing Search Engines With Meta Tags" (1998) 12(1) Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 43.
[9] The issue of copyright infringement by meta sites has not yet been judicially determined, although it has been held at interlocutory stage that meta sites could potentially support a derivative works claim: Futuredontics Inc v Applied Anagramics Inc (1998) US Dist LEXIS 2265 (C.D Cal, Jan 30, 1998).
[10] Bidders Edge compiles product descriptions and pricing from a number of Internet auction sites and compiles them in comparative form on its own site for consumer inspection. See G Sandoval and T Wolverton "eBay files suit against auction site Bidders Edge" December 15, 1999 Cnet.news.com.
[11] T Wolverton "eBay, Bidders Edge face off in Court" April 14 2000, Cnet.news.com
[12] Ibid
[13] C McCarry, Citizen Nader (London, Jonathon Cape, 1972) at pp317, 320
[14] J P Barlow "Selling Wine Without Bottles on the Global Net: The Economy of Mind on the Global Net." In High Noon on the Electronic Frontier : Conceptual Issues in Cyberspace (P Ludlow (ed).MIT Press, MA, 1996)
[15] S Wright "Property, Information and the Ethics of Communication" (1994) 9 IPJ 47 at 50; R Nimmer & P Krauthaus "Information as Commodity: New Imperatives of Commercial Law." (1992) 55(3) Law and Contemporary Problems 103 at 106
[16] G Bateson cited in J P Barlow "Selling Wine Without Bottles: The Economy of the Mind on the Global Net" at http://www.eff.org/pub/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/HTML/idea_economy_article.html at 19
[17] Ibid
[18] Supra Krauthaus at 107
[19] T Mandeville "An Information Economics Perspective on Innovation." (1998) International Journal of Social Economics pp357-64; also D Bell "The Social Framework for the Information Society" in M Dertouses and J Moses The Computer Age: A Twenty Year View (MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 1979) pp163-211
[20] See Chapter 3, S Ricketson, M Richardson Intellectual Property: Cases, Materials and Commentary 2nd ed (Butterworths, Sydney, 1998)
[21] Hollinrake v Truswell (1894) 3 Ch D 420. Followed in Exxon Corporation v Exxon Insurance Ltd [1982] 1 Ch 119 at 142-3; and Express Newspapers plc v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo plc 1985] FSR 306.
[22] Baker v Selden (1880) 101 U.S 99
[23] supra Nimmer & Krauthaus at 106
[24] see generally ss22 and 29 of the Copyright Act 1968
[25] J Ginsberg "Creation and Commercial Value: Copyright Protection and Works of Information." (1990) 90 Columbia Law Review 1865 at 1867
[26] D Schmidt "Online White Noise and the Rise of Meta Content" unpublished April 1999.
[27] D Shenk Data Smog: Surviving the Information Glut (San Fran, California, Harpers Edge) 1997 1st ed
[28] Ibid
[29] E Schlachter "The Intellectual Property Renaissance in Cyberspace: Why Copyright Law Could be Unimportant on the Internet." (Spring 1997) 12(1) Berkeley Technology Law Journal at http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/12_1/Schlachter/html/reader.html ; also N Moore "Rights and Responsibilities in an Information Society" (1998) (1) The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) available at http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/infosoc/98_1moor/default.htm
[30] op cit Schmidt at 5, This process has also been labelled that of "disinformation": P Virilio Red Alert in Cyberspace (1995).
[31] P Gowder "The Transparent Society - Data Smog" (book review) (1999) 12(2) Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 513 at 518
[32] Ibid
[33] E Dyson "Intellectual Property on the Net" a http://www.eff.org/pub/Publications/Esther_Dyson/ip_on_the_net.article ; also E Katsch "The First Amendment and Technological Change: The New Media Have a Message" (1989) 57 George Washington University Law Review 1459 at 1478
[34] op cit Schmidt at 1
[35] Op cit Gowder at 520
[36] S Ghosh "Gray Markets in Cyberspace" unpublished paper 1999 at 33; also T Lipinski "The Developing Legal Infrastructure and the Globalisation of Information: Constructing a Framework for Critical Choices in the New Millennium Internet - Character, Content and Confusion." (1999) 6 Richmond Journal of Law and Technology 19 at http://www.richmond.edu/jolt/v6i4/article2.html
[37] op cit Nathenson at 135.
[38] M Heim "The Erotic Ontology of Cyberspace" in Cyberspace: First Steps (M Benedikt (ed), Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press, 1991) p77
[39] op cit Sterling.
[40] Trade Practices Commission Application of the Trade Practices Act to Intellectual Property - Background Paper 1991.
[41] P Drahos "Property, Opportunity, and Self Interest" in A Philosophy of Intellectual Property 1996, Dartmouth, Sydney at p119. See also F H Easterbrook "Insider Trading, Secret Agents, Evidentiary Privileges and the Production of Information." (1981) The Supreme Court Review 309 at 313.
[42] "manufacturers cannot live without new products" G William Trivoli "Has the Consumer Really Lost His Sovereignty" in Consumerism - Viewpoint from Business, Government, and the Public Interest R Gaedeke and W Etcheson (eds) (Lanfield Press, San Fran, 1972).
[43] T Bourgoinie "Characteristics of Consumer Law" (1992) 14 Journal of Consumer Law pp293-315
[44] J K Galbraith The New Industrial State, (London: H Hamilton, 1967)
[45] see infra note 52
[46] J K Galbraith The Affluent Society, (London, H Hamilton, 1958)
[47] See also R Marris "Galbraith, Solow , and the Truth About Corporations" in The Public Interest 1968
[48] J K Galbraith Economics and The Public Purpose , (Harmondsworth, Pelican, 1975) pp241-250
[49] supra Schmidt at 6
[50] M Hamilton "Appropriation Art and the Imminent Decline in Authorial Control over Copyrighted Works" (1994) 42 Journal of the Copyright Society 93; M Lemley "Romantic Authorship and the Rhetoric of Property" (1997) 75 Texas Law Review 873 at 883
[51] C Offe "Alternative Strategies in Consumer Policy" in Contradictions of the Welfare State (J Keane (ed), Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press, 1984).
[52] Ibid
[53] P Drahos "Information Feudalism in the Information Society" (1995) 11 The Information Society at 212.
[54] T Flew "The Goldsworthy Report: Credibility and Australian Information Policy" Media International Australia Incorporating Culture and Policy, No 87,May 1998, pp15-22
[55] Id at 214-217.
[56] Id at 212
[57] This essay notes that this statement is subject to all of the usual literature regarding the capture of regulatory agency by corporate interests etc as espoused within works such as R B Horwitz The Irony of Regulatory Reform (New York: OUP, 1989); C Offe "The Theory of the Capitalist State and the Problem of Policy Formation" in I Lindberg Stress and Contradiction in Modern Capitalism: Public Policy and the Theory of the State, (Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books 1975); C Arup Innovation Policy and Law: Australia and the International High Technology" (Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: CUP, 1993) but because of word constraints, this criticism is abstracted from this essay.
[58] Supra Drahos at 218
[59] Id at 210
[60] op cit Trade Practices Commission Background Paper at 5; J Ginsberg "Creation and Commercial Value: Copyright and the Protection of Works of Information" (1990) 90 Columbia Law Review 1865 at 1909; R Cass "Copyright, Licensing, and the First Screen" (1999) 5 Mich. Telecomm. Tech Law Rev 35 available at http://www.mttlr.org/volfive/cass.html
[61] S Breyer "The Uneasy Case of Copyright, A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies and Computer Programs" (1970) 84(2) Harvard Law Review 281
[62] The two distinguishing features of public goods are nonexcludibility and nonrivalrous competition: P Menell "An Analysis of the Scope of Copyright Protection for Application Programs." (1989) 41 Stanford Law Review 1045 at 1059
[63] Office of Regulation Review An Economic Analysis of Copyright Reform, submission to the Copyright Law Review Committee's review of the Copyright Act 1968, October 1995.
[64] R Cornes and T Sandler The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods and Club Goods (Cambridge Press, New York, 1986) pp29-30;
[65] H Demsetz "Toward a Theory of Property Rights" (1967) 57 American Economic Review 347
[66] P Drahos A Philosophy of Intellectual Property (Dartmouth, Aldershot, Sydney 1996) at p126.
[67] P Samuelson "The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure" (1954) 36 Review of Economics and Statistics 387
[68] op cit Demsetz. This was his example of animal extinction in the Indian tribes' (Montagnes) hunting grounds.
[69] Op cit Lemley at 902
[70] E Katsch Law in a Digital World (Oxford University Press, New York, 1995) at 4
[71] A Dawson "The Intellectual Commons: A Rationale for Regulation" (1998) 16(3) Prometheus 275 at 281; also K E Boulding "The Economics of Knowledge and the Knowledge of Economics" (1966) 56(2) American Economic Review 25
[72] C Primo Braga & C Fink "The Economic Justification for the Grant of Intellectual Property Rights: Patterns of Convergence and Conflict." (1996)
[72] Chicago-Kent Law Review 439 at 445.
[73] Op cit Schlacter at 4
[74] This was a practice commenced by Borland in the 1980's. P Carroll "On Your Honour; Software Firms Remove Copy Protection Devices" Wall Street Journal 25 September 1986
[75] J P Barlow "The Economy of Ideas: A Framework for Rethinking Patents and Copyrights in the Digital Age" (1994) Wired 84 at 129; E Dyson "Intellectual Value" (1995) Wired at 136
[76] B Frank "On An Art Without Copyright" (1996) 49 Kyklos pp3-15
[77] IP claims to be consistent with goals of economic efficiency: W Landes and R Posner "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law" (1989) 18(2) Journal of Legal Studies pp325-363; S Naresh "Incontestability and Rights in Descriptive Trademarks" (1986) 53 University of Chicago Law Review 953; Landes and R Posner "Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective" (1987) 30 Journal of Law and Economics 265
[78] J Brodley "The Economic Goals of Antitrust: Efficiency, Consumer Welfare, and Technological Progress." (1987) New York University Law Review 1021 at 1025.
[79] R Bork The Antitrust Paradox (Basic Books, NY, 1978); R Posner Antitrust Law: An Economic Perspective (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1976); P Clarke and S Corones Competition Law and Policy: Cases and Materials (OUP, Melbourne, 1999)
[80] R Coase "The Problem of Social Cost" (1960) 3 Journal of Law and Economics pp1-44
[81] Ibid; also A Schotter Microeconomics: A Modern Approach (Harper Collins, NY, 1994) at p525
[82] One behavioural assumption of transaction cost theory is "strongly maximising rationality" which is defined as "self interest seeking with guile" Thus the seller, behaving rationality, will not permit the purchaser to view the information commodity prior to purchase: O Williamson The Economic Institutions Of Capitalism (New York: Free Press; London: Collier MacMillan, 1985) Ch 1.
[83] J Hirshleifer " The Private and Social Value of Information and the Reward to Inventive Activity" (1971) 61 American Economic Review 561
[84] K Arrow "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention", in the Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity (NBER, Princeton University Press 1962) pp609-26. Note that some commentators have claimed that this info paradox can be solved by bi-partisan confidentiality agreements or the existence of misappropriation claims. By such apparatus, the purchaser could view the info prior to sale but still be excluded from prematurely receiving its benefits. R Merges "Intellectual Property and Digital Content: Notes on a Scorecard." (1996) June Cyberspace Law 15. The author suspect that this would raise the negotiation costs of the bargain thus adding little improvement to the efficiency of the result in Coasian terms, but such criticism and analysis, is, by necessity, oustide of the parameters of this paper.
[85] Id at 616
[86] IP is a restriction on consumption in favour of an increase in production. M Lehman "The Theory of Property Rights and the Protection of Intellectual and Industrial Property" (1985) 16 IIC 538 at 539
[87] T Mandeville, "An Information Economics Perspective on Innovation." (1998) International Journal of Social Economics 357-364; also H Rosenburg Perspectives on Technology (CUP, Cambridge MA 1976)
[88] J Boyle Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society (HUP, MA, 1996) at p35
[89] B V Hindley "The Economic Theory of Patents, Copyright, and Registered Industrial Design" Background Study to the Report on Intellectual and Industrial Property, Economic Council of Canada.1971 at p1; J Cohen "Lochner in Cyberspace: The Economic Orthodoxy of "Rights Management" (1998) 97 Michigan Law Review (forthcoming)
[90] E Hettinger "Justifying Intellectual Property" (1989) 18 Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 at 36; M Haynes "Commentary: Black Holes of Innovation in the Software Arts" (1998) 14 Berkeley Journal of Law and Technology at http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/14_2/Haynes/html/reader.html
[91] op cit Breyer, also S Shavell & T Van Ypersele "Rewards Versus Intellectual Property Rights" NBER Working Paper Series at http://www.nber.org/papers/w6956
[92] Op cit Trade Practices Commission Background Paper "to reward labour and skill that an inventor, author or designer has contributed to society by virtue of the invention." At p5
[93] B Martin "Against Intellectual Property" (1995) 21 Philosophy and Social Action 7 at 10.
[94] Chapter V Book II, J Locke Two Treatises of Government 1690; (H Morley (ed) London, Routledge & Sons, 1884).
[95] P Drahos "Locke, Labour and the Intellectual Commons" Ch3 in A Philosophy of Intellectual Property op cit; also N Kleinman "Copyright, Property and Philosophy" in Social Interaction in an Electronic Environment (Hampton Press, NJ, NY, 1996)
[96] op cit Locke at 27.
[97] See B Fried Robert Hale and Progressive Legal Economics (forthcoming, HUP) unpublished manuscript.
[98] In general, the term of copyright is life of author + 50 years. Op cit Ricketson at 187
[99] A Reese "Reflections on the Intellectual Commons: Two Perspectives on Copyright Duration and Reversion." 47 Stanford Law Review 707.
[100] Op cit Cohen at 39
[101] Op cit Hettinger at 44-5
[102] R Nozick Anarchy, State and Utopia (New York: Basic Books 1974) at p175.
[103] H Spector "An Outline of a Theory Justifying Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights." (1989) 8 EIPR 270 at 272
[104] op cit Hettinger at 38
[105] M Pendleton "Opinion - Intellectual Property, Information Based Society and a New International Economic Order - the Policy Options" (1985) 2 EIPR 31
[106] "The Internet has an anti-monopolistic bias" K Yong Chan "Copyright and Internet: Social Claims and Government's Intervention." (1996) (unpublished) at http://www.msu.edu/user/kimyong2/copy.htm
[107] op cit Arup at 49
[108] Note that the use of an existing legal instrument is regarded by the author as being separate from the use of existing jurisprudence. Legal structures such as Part IIIA are merely frameworks into within which jurisprudence is considered and exercised. As legal instruments are value neutral tools, this author does not find a problem with the recommendation of an existing legal tool, even where the jurisprudence that normally animates that tool is being attacked.
[109] op cit Tucker at 30
[110] Ibid
[111] Federal Trade Commission 1995 Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property: Harmonising the Commercial Use of Legal Monopolies with the Prohibitions of Antitrust law." (FTC, 1995) at 1
[112] see s2 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, stating the objects of the Act.
[113] Id at 2
[114] National Competition Council, The National Access Regime (NCC, August 1996)
[115] s44B of the TPA within the definition of "service"
[116] for example, access has been granted to facilities such as football stadiums and convention centres: Hart Productions Inc v Greater Cincinnati Convention & Visitors Bureau [1990] 2 Trade Cases 69, 233; Hecht v Pro Football, Inc [1977] 2 Trade Cases 61,773
[117] MCI Communications Corp v American Telegraph and Telephone Co (1982-83) Trade Cases (CCH) 65,137
[118] R Kewalram "The Essential Facilities Doctrine and Section 46 of the Trade Practices Act: Fine Tuning the Hilmer Report on National Competition Policy." (1994) 2 Trade Practices Law Journal 188; R Patterson "Making Hilmer Clear: The Essential Facility Recommendation and the New Zealand Experience." (1994) 2 Trade Practices Law Journal 130
[119] National Competition Policy Review Report (Hilmer Report) at p243.
[120] Id at 248
[121] K McMahon "Refusals to Supply By Corporations With Substantial Market Power" (1994) 22 Australian Business Law Review 7
[122] A Van Melle "Refusals to License Intellectual Property Rights: The Impact of RTE v EC Commission (Magill) on Australian and New Zealand Competition Law" (1997) 25 Australian Business Law Review 4 at 24.
[123] L Melville, Forms and Agreements in Intellectual Property and International Licensing (Clark Boardman Company, NY; Sweet & Maxwell Ltd, London, 1979, 1991 ed) par 1.3
[124] US v Loew's Inc (1962) 371 US 38; Jefferson Parish Hospital District (No 2) v Hyde (1984) 466 US 2
[125] op cit Van Melle at 25
[126] The presence of substitutes is a central consideration as to the issue of market power: Dowling v Dalgety Australia Ltd (1992) 34 FCR 109; also op cit TPA Background paper at 4.7
[127] Magill at par 47
[128] P Brudenall "The Collective Administration of Copyright and Competition Policy: Tension in the Digital Age" (1997) 8 AIPJ 121 at 130.
[129] Op cit Van Melle at 13
[130] Taprobane Tours WA Pty Ltd v Singapore Airlines Ltd (1990) ATPR 41-054; Tillmans Butcheries Pty Ltd v Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union (1979) 42 FLR 331.
[131] APRA v Ceridale [1991] ATPR 41-074 at 510-511
[132] op cit Kewalram at 200
[133] Id at 1,187
[134] op cit Van Melle at 16
[135] op cit Phan at 181
[136] op cit Patterson at 148
[137] National Competition Council, Considering the Public Interest under the National Competition Policy paper released November 1996 at 3
[138] W Pengilly "Hilmer and "Essential Facilities"" (1994) 17(1) UNSWLJ 1 at42
[139] This list of factors reflects subclause 1(3) of the Competition Principles Agreement signed at the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) in April 1995.
[140] Op cit NCC paper at 17
[141] P Brudenall "Fair Dealing in Australian Copyright Law: Rights of Access Under the Microscope" (1997) 20(2) UNSWLJ 443 at 444
[142] op cit Phan at 181
[143] W Gordon "Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the Betamax case and its Predecessors" (1982) 82 Columbia Law Review 1600 at 1603.
[144] Op cit Futuredontics
[145] Derivative works are catered for by s31(1) of the Copyright Act 1968 when read with the interpretation of "adaptation" in s10(1).
[146] G Fulton "Fair Dealing in the Digital Age" (1996) 92 Australian Copyright Council Bulletin 8.
[147] Mowman v Tegg (1826) 38 ER 380 at 386 per Eldon LJ
[148] Television New Zealand Ltd v NewsMonitor Services Ltd (1994) 27 IPR 441
[149] American Geophysical Union v Texaco, Inc (1994) 29 IPR 381
[150] op cit Television New Zealand at 463
[151] op cit Sinclair at 189
[152] M Sinclair "Fair is not always Fair: Media Monitors and Copyright." [1997] 4 EIPR 188 at 189
[153] K Crews "The MDS Decision and Fair Use for Coursepacks." (1996) 9 AIPLB 52
[154] supra Anderson at note 4
[155] S Greenz, A Primer on Postmodernism (B Eerdmans Publishing Co, NY, 1996)
[156] P Janzsi "On the Author Effect: Contemporary Copyright and Collective Creativity" in The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature 29 (M Woodmansee & P Jaszi (eds), Durham, London: Duke University Press, 1994)
[157] op cit Phan at 207
[158] see generally s40 of the Copyright Act 1968
[159] see 17 USC 107
[160] Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc v Carol Publishing Group, Inc (1998) 42 IPR 371 at 381-2
[161] op cit Phan at 213
[162] Computer Associates International, Inc v Altai, Inc 982 F.2d 693, at 712 (2d Cir. 1992)
[163] T A Stewart, Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organisations (Doubleday, New York, 1997, p6)
[164] op cit Drahos at 55
[165] P Ludlow "Property Rights, Piracy, etc: Does Information "Want to be Free?"" in High Noon on the Electronic Frontier: Conceptual Issues in Cyberspace (P Ludlow (ed), MIT Press, 1996) at 4
[166] Ibid
[167] W Mitchell City of Bits (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1995)
[168] op cit Barlow at 10
[169] Matthew, Chapter IX, verses 16 and 17