About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

19 Info. & Comm. Tech. L. 1 (2010)

handle is hein.journals/infctel19 and id is 1 raw text is: Information & Communications Technology Law Routledge Vol. 19, No. 1, March 2010, 1-26 R Taylor&Francis Group Copyright liability for users and distributors of content sharing and communication technologies: a crossroads between past and present Eugenia Georgiades* University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia and Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia In the last decade or so, society has seen the beginnings of a digital revolution where innovation and technological advancement met and changed the way in which people use digital technology. This has only increased the ambit of confusion between the law and technology innovation. This is evident with the creation and distribution of content sharing and communication technologies such as peer-to- peer, network distributive systems, file sharing software and other technology enabling software where users are able to share and access information. The recurring issues that appear throughout case precedent have reinforced the uncertainty and confusion over the interpretation of authorisation. This paper will explore the concept of authorisation and evaluate the courts' interpretation of what constitutes an authorisation of infringement with respect to technology innovators of communication technologies. This will be achieved through a discussion of the cases that explored 'authorisation' through the genealogy of authorisation. It is important to discuss the history of authorisation first, and then evaluate how the courts have interpreted 'authorisation'. This paper will demonstrate how the interpretation of authorisation has created ambiguity and uncertainty for technology innovators and developers. Keywords: authorisation; intermediaries; intermediary liability; copyright infringement 1. Introduction The concept of authorisation in copyright law has an extensive history as demonstrated in established case law. In Australia, there are established cases on 'authorisation' which pre-date the 1920s. Most of these cases relate to the performance of copyrighted works and are specific to theatrical performances. The doctrine of authorisation was evaluated on a case-by-case basis using precedent as a guide. The notion of authorisation was developed through the courts' interpretation as to whether infringement occurred through authorisation. There has been little clarification as to what 'authorisation' of infringement means by the courts. The courts have certainly created confusion as to what constitutes authorisation through the development of the doctrine of authorisation, which was not clarified as society evolved and technology advanced. Interpretation has played an important role within the doctrine of authorisation and it has been the basis for the creation of uncertainty within technological innovation. *Email: jenny.georgiades@qut.edu.au ISSN 1360-0834 print/ISSN 1469-8404 online @ 2010 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/13600831003593154 http://www.informaworld.com

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most