Dear Divorce Doctor,

Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc (EFA), is a non-profit national
organisation concerned with "piracy" of copyright material.

They are concerned with protecting and promoting on-line civil liberties.

They can be contacted at:

Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc
PO Box 382
North Adelaide SA 5006

Phone: 02 9011 1088
Fax: 02 8002 4009
Mail: email@efa.org.au

Or visit their website: http://www.efa.org.au/about/contact/

They may be able to help.

Take care.

Good one Foxy! We are community and we care of each other.

Hello Divorce Doctor,

Copyight covers "broadcast" and "computer software". With the latter you might find cases old than the Internet: Did write any HTMTL or similiar? Look at ss 32(1) and (2). But it could be hard:

"Fox and Lockhart JJ found that the object code programs [sic. programmes]within the meaning of s 31 (1) (vi) of the Copyright Act (1984): 53 ALR 225. In the High Court a majority found that, while the source code programs were literary works attracting copyright, the object programs, mere electical programs [sic. programmes],
merely electronic impulses, were not. (1986) 60 ALJR 313. Citation: Vermeesch & Lindgen (1992), Business Law of Australia, pp. 440-441.

[What a strange ruling. Does that mean that when we read a copied book that we don't read the letters but photons produced off the print? O.]

Since the 1984 ruling there may has between a leglisative response to
the above ruling on whether would are still works when not expressed in a visible form and reproduction is a "material form" of the literary works. " Both source code object codes" are now regarded literary works. Citation: Vermeesch & Lindgen (1992), Busiss Law of Australi, pp. 440-441

If your adversary claims the work as her/his own, find a fault, and sue, under Section TPA s. 52? Good must be fit for purpose in trade or commerce. Is the copyist charging*? At least least you force them to a tribunal, costing them half-a-day. If you win good. Maybe not. But, if don't win the magastrate might rule it its a copyright matter, something you can say to a judge in court [a fellow judicial person, not a lawyer].

* With free dealing there are limits to "fair dealing". See Copyright Pt III Div 3 & fair dealing ss 40-42 Citation: Vermeesch & Lindgen (1992), Busiss Law of Australia pp 446-447]. If free also how cannot be known that the copyist work will not be copied by anotyh copyist and a price charged?

Best regards.

O.