Moral rights: Exploring the myths, meanings and misunderstandings in Australian Copyright Law

Francina Cantatore, Jane Johnston

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article examines how moral rights are treated in Australian publishing contracts, and whether this approach is consistent with the expectations of authors, journalists and academics. Although, in theory, moral rights cannot be sold or assigned in Australia, the apparent wide scope for exceptions raises questions of whether there is any real protection afforded to creators under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), notably in circumstances that relate to pressure on creators to accept contractual terms in order to get published. Additionally, Australian case law reflects some uncertainty about the traditionally accepted non-economic nature of moral rights. The article examines recent case law in this field, found in Meskenas, Perez and Corby, and considers the literature associated with development of moral rights in Australia. It then presents the findings of a two-part study of moral rights in Australia; first through the results of interviews with 176 Australian authors, journalists and academics, followed by an analysis of 20 publishing contracts. It concludes that--in some, but not all, instances--a combination of the exceptions allowed under the Act and practical exigencies have diluted the unique character of authors' moral rights and have created an environment of uncertainty.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)71-92
Number of pages22
JournalDeakin Law Review
Volume21
Issue number1
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2016

Fingerprint

myth
case law
journalist
Law
act
uncertainty
interview
literature

Cite this

@article{f11c5a81669444ffa639397368b7c7f1,
title = "Moral rights: Exploring the myths, meanings and misunderstandings in Australian Copyright Law",
abstract = "This article examines how moral rights are treated in Australian publishing contracts, and whether this approach is consistent with the expectations of authors, journalists and academics. Although, in theory, moral rights cannot be sold or assigned in Australia, the apparent wide scope for exceptions raises questions of whether there is any real protection afforded to creators under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), notably in circumstances that relate to pressure on creators to accept contractual terms in order to get published. Additionally, Australian case law reflects some uncertainty about the traditionally accepted non-economic nature of moral rights. The article examines recent case law in this field, found in Meskenas, Perez and Corby, and considers the literature associated with development of moral rights in Australia. It then presents the findings of a two-part study of moral rights in Australia; first through the results of interviews with 176 Australian authors, journalists and academics, followed by an analysis of 20 publishing contracts. It concludes that--in some, but not all, instances--a combination of the exceptions allowed under the Act and practical exigencies have diluted the unique character of authors' moral rights and have created an environment of uncertainty.",
author = "Francina Cantatore and Jane Johnston",
year = "2016",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "71--92",
journal = "Deakin Law Review",
issn = "1321-3660",
number = "1",

}

Moral rights: Exploring the myths, meanings and misunderstandings in Australian Copyright Law. / Cantatore, Francina; Johnston, Jane.

In: Deakin Law Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2016, p. 71-92.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Moral rights: Exploring the myths, meanings and misunderstandings in Australian Copyright Law

AU - Cantatore, Francina

AU - Johnston, Jane

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This article examines how moral rights are treated in Australian publishing contracts, and whether this approach is consistent with the expectations of authors, journalists and academics. Although, in theory, moral rights cannot be sold or assigned in Australia, the apparent wide scope for exceptions raises questions of whether there is any real protection afforded to creators under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), notably in circumstances that relate to pressure on creators to accept contractual terms in order to get published. Additionally, Australian case law reflects some uncertainty about the traditionally accepted non-economic nature of moral rights. The article examines recent case law in this field, found in Meskenas, Perez and Corby, and considers the literature associated with development of moral rights in Australia. It then presents the findings of a two-part study of moral rights in Australia; first through the results of interviews with 176 Australian authors, journalists and academics, followed by an analysis of 20 publishing contracts. It concludes that--in some, but not all, instances--a combination of the exceptions allowed under the Act and practical exigencies have diluted the unique character of authors' moral rights and have created an environment of uncertainty.

AB - This article examines how moral rights are treated in Australian publishing contracts, and whether this approach is consistent with the expectations of authors, journalists and academics. Although, in theory, moral rights cannot be sold or assigned in Australia, the apparent wide scope for exceptions raises questions of whether there is any real protection afforded to creators under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), notably in circumstances that relate to pressure on creators to accept contractual terms in order to get published. Additionally, Australian case law reflects some uncertainty about the traditionally accepted non-economic nature of moral rights. The article examines recent case law in this field, found in Meskenas, Perez and Corby, and considers the literature associated with development of moral rights in Australia. It then presents the findings of a two-part study of moral rights in Australia; first through the results of interviews with 176 Australian authors, journalists and academics, followed by an analysis of 20 publishing contracts. It concludes that--in some, but not all, instances--a combination of the exceptions allowed under the Act and practical exigencies have diluted the unique character of authors' moral rights and have created an environment of uncertainty.

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 71

EP - 92

JO - Deakin Law Review

JF - Deakin Law Review

SN - 1321-3660

IS - 1

ER -