Recent developments

1.    Spam and surveillance

NSW amdts to Workplace Video Surveillance Act prohibition

v       Potential conflict between corporate practise of monitoring web and email and this prohibition on workplace surveillance.

v       Problem of Spam Act

v       See David Vaile's presentation at AusCERT, web site

Spam Act 2003 in operation

v       Widespread attempts to get permission

v       Revise databases.

2.    Governance - Digital Documents - Evidence

McCabe v BAT

v       Initial striking out of BAT defence due to 'evidence destruction' as motive behind 'document retention' policy.

v       Overruled in Court of Appeal

v       US DoJ interest

v       US Department of Justice seeks to examine law firm partner Cannar in NSW Supreme Court

v       Report released today in Moves in Victoria to make it a criminal  offence to destroy email evidence

v       See our forthcoming Digital Documents Retention White paper, on website soon

3.    Intellectual Property

Free Trade Agreement Ch. 17

v       Concerns about impact on Open Source software in Australia - competitive advantage

v       Emerging campaign to review the concessions made

v       CIE analysis not attempt quantify, criticised by Garnaut, others

v       Fair use? Who will raise this?

v       Fees charged for library and uni web caching?

v       See our Web site: FTA symposium

Creative Licensing

v       Creative Commons licence

v       Free For Education

v       Conference in November 18

v       See our web site: IP conference

4.    Privacy

Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment (Stored Communications) Bill 2004

v       Surveillance without a warrant of potential wide range of messages: email, SMS, MMS, web, voicemail ...

v       See EFA and APF

Under current law, an interception warrant is required to access the contents of email, SMS and voice mail messages that are temporarily delayed and stored during passage over the telecommunications system, (e.g. stored on an ISP's or telephone service provider's equipment pending delivery to the intended recipient), the same as is required to intercept a telephone call.

The Bill would remove the existing protection from interception for email, SMS and voice mail messages that have not been delivered to the intended recipient, thereby allowing government agencies (not only police), private investigation agencies, telephone companies and ISPs and other businesses to access such communications, without a warrant of any type.

Although the Commonwealth Government frequently cites enthusiasm for "technology neutral" laws, this Bill is certainly not. It treats email, SMS and voice mail telecommunications quite differently from facsimile and telephone call telecommunications.

 

v       http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Privacy/tia-bill2004-sc.html

APPC and APEC Privacy Principles

v       Behind closed doors, US influence weakening drafts

v       Best practice, or weakest?

v       APEC ecommerce

v       APPCC Formed 2003, global membership

v       Submissions

v       See our web site: APPCC

5.    Internet Governance -

 ICANN v Verisign

v       VeriSign attempt to redirect bad URLs Sept 2003

v       Forced to stop

v       Verisign case against ICANN, claim damage business, antitrust, outside power

v       See our web site: Selby LTT

6.    Open Source

v       Sun announcing the open sourcing of Solaris and possibly java. 

v       ATO has also promised to be "more open" and RDBMS sales on Linux are booming

v       SCO: Most legal observers discount the legal claims by SCO as illegitimate. But there are bigger challenges to contemplate than those from SCO. In fact, users face a convergence of issues that may ultimately lead to other claims being brought against Linux and open-source software.

v       http://www.groklaw.net

v       ttp://www.opensourcelaw.biz