On the new Fairfax and News Corp copyright scheme?

Adam Suckling CEO, Copyright Agency writes: Re. “Should you be worried about Fairfax and News Corp’s ridiculous new copyright scheme?” (Wednesday)

Asher Wolf could have picked up the phone yesterday to us before writing her piece about the Copyright Agency’s new open licence for the use of newspaper content.

If she had done a basic fact-check, she would have discovered the open copyright licence for the use of newspaper content is not, in fact, aimed at journalists quoting from other publishers’ content. Journalists can already quote from other publishers under our existing copyright law.  

What the new licence is designed to do is allow non-commercial and non-editorial uses of media publisher content and also reflects the open licence available from The Guardian.

More substantial uses do require payment to the creators of the material, because, as we know, high quality journalism does not come free and delivers untold benefits to our society. That’s what our copyright laws help to deliver.

This open licence has been developed on behalf of the publishers Fairfax Media, Bauer Media, News Corporation, West Australian Newspapers, Elliot Newspaper Group, Pacific Magazines, Torch Publishing and Border Watch Pty Ltd. It is in response to questions from members of the public about whether they need permission to do certain things with newspaper articles, such as reproduce articles in their family history books or in their PHD theses; or use headlines in a book.

The Copyright Agency also receives many requests for permission to link to publishers’ websites as this is something mentioned in some of the publishers’ terms and conditions of use on their websites.

News websites terms and conditions of use, generally require permission for any use outside of the personal, non-commercial uses specified in those T&Cs. See terms and conditions of use from Crikey as an example.

Most of the publishers have a separate photographic syndication department that specialises in handling copyright for the pictures, graphics and illustrations which appear in their papers. See: Fairfax Syndication, NewsPix and Bauer Syndication. This is why we excluded those works from this licence.

On Andrew Forrest and the cashless welfare card

John Newton writes: “A brief history of Twiggy Forrest’s obsession with cashless welfare”  (Thursday)

Could someone at Crikey please initiate an investigation into the reality behind the success of failure of this card? Which would include what other measures could or should be or have been taken to avert the crisis in the remote communities.

Like, for example, encouraging local indigenous businesses and employment. So far all I’ve read is bluster on one side or the other.