There is a lot said about copyright of images and videos on the internet, but it almost impossible to find any cases where anyone was prosecuted under the Copyright Act.

As a result it is "business as normal" at [for example] UTube where you can essentially post whatever you like.

So is it the same with EBooks, eg Stephen King gave away using EBooks and went back to the "destroy them forests" method, seemingly because his lawyers told him "no go" in courts?

But having had my own EBook pirated my reading of Copyright Act is like an open invite to prosecute and get large damages claim.

So is the problem simply that the big money from Publishing Houses [hard copy] blocks any path to relief in courts via lawyers [meaning it might be dead easy for a Self Represent Litigant?]

Was your book an interesting book Divorce Doctor?
I wrote one on some of my experiences but I didnt copyright it.
I wrote it with the heart attitude being "Here it is. Ive passed on the knowledge to you the reader. Do with it as you wish".
I dont like copyright.
Copyright always seems selfish...but thats my attitude.
Jesus preached free, so theres it is.

The problem with electronic piracy is more that it is difficult to track down the offender. Also, there are typically many offenders and each one causes you only a small amount of damages, which is less than the cost of legal action.

There have been some successful litigation actions, but they are usually against the companies that set up facilities that enable and encourage privacy (ie, sue youtube, not the people who post on it.

Avoid lawyers if possible. They will suck you dry. Send a threatening letter instead.

is any book interesting?

seems to depend on the particular reader, eg I would have no interest in a book called Stars of Big Brother, but a lot of morons would

seems my book was of most interest to Howard himself, which is understandable as it lifted the lid on his devices in Fam Law and CSA

But as I stated in my "market survey" of do people want such a book yes/no ie, no matter how much I lifted the lid and threatened to save them the shirt off THEIR back [god forbid] would they just continue with Stockholm Syndrome and keep watching Big Brother

I concluded the latter but STILL did the book

also mate no such thing as taking out a copyright [you are confusing with patents]

Divorce Doctor

This is the site to the Australian Copyright Council
http://www.copyright.org.au/

They should be able to assist/advise you. Copyright is tightly regulated.

Best of luck.

Divorce Doctor:

-Quote-

UNIVERSAL MUSIC AUSTRALIA PTY LTD & ORS v SHARMAN LICENCE HOLDINGS LTD & ORS

- Before: Wilcox J.

- (2005) AIPC ¶92-127;

- [2005] FCA 1242

Decision of the Federal Court of Australia

Decision delivered 5 September 2005

Intellectual property — Copyright — Infringement — Sound recordings — Internet peer-to-peer file sharing system — Whether respondents authorised infringement of copyright by users of Kazaa system — Whether respondents had knowledge of, and intention relating to uses of the system by Kazaa users — Whether Kazaa system includes a central server — Technological controls by the respondents — Defence to copyright infringement — Whether the respondents merely facilities to users of Kazaa system — Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) s 10, 13(2), 22(6), 85, 101, 112E.

-End Quote-

Cited CCH [Online] 14 May 2008

There were multiple offences alledged. In sum, partial infridgement was found. Too involved to discuss issues here.

-- Quote in Part-

"Subject to that comment, I think it is appropriate to grant an injunction to restrain future infringements of the applicants' copyrights. This injunction should be couched in general terms, reflecting the relevant respondents' general obligation not further to infringe the applicants' copyright. However, I am anxious not to make an order which the respondents are not able to obey, except at the unacceptable cost of preventing the sharing even of files which do not infringe the applicants' copyright. There needs to be an opportunity for the relevant respondents to modify the Kazaa system in a targeted way, so as to protect the applicants' copyright interests (as far as possible) but without unnecessarily intruding on others' freedom of speech and communication. The evidence about keyword filtering and gold file flood filtering, indicates how this might be done. It should be provided that the injunctive order will be satisfied if the respondents take either of these steps. The steps, in my judgment, are available to the respondents and likely significantly, though perhaps not totally, to protect the applicants' copyrights."

-End Quote - Wilcox J.