CraigT

The business impact of internet filtering needs to be closely considered regarding any proposed mandatory filtering proposal. Gambling needs to be considered from a national perspective - there is scant change for state-based legislations to adequately manage the global nature of gambling in the current world. Equally any type of economic or social activity that occurs online must have a nationally agreed framework, or be under federal control for effective management. Effectively state-governments do not have the power to provide effective governance in a connected world, and should be downsized to regional units focused on service provision rather than regulation. GST and other taxes need to be rethought regarding how they apply in a world where people may choose to buy from any supplier, regardless of their geographic location. Taxes based on supplier location could become limiters to economic activity where a purchaser can simply choose to buy from a supplier located in a lower-tax jurisdiction. I can see this transferring more tax burden to buyers in order to maintain revenues. Copyright requires serious rethinking, starting with government use of strict copyrights rather than Creative Commons and stretching to the failure of copyright to effectively regulate the music and movie industries. These industries have resisted change to their detriment and are seeking to close gates after bolting horses. The government has a role in shifting the landscape to encourage publishers to shift with it in order to maintain profitability without restricting access to content desired by the community. The nobbling of TIVO by Channel 7 and the suing of iiNet are two examples of the desperation by which these industries are seeking to maintain their old business models in the face of widespread community disaffection. Artist rights need to be protected, but not necessarily for the massive profits of middlemen who controlled physical distribution channels. With new channels we need new approaches. Business registration and regulation is another area that requires national consideration. When I can register a business name in one state and trade globally it can create enormous issues. This needs to move to a federal program, allowing geographically limited naming in specific circumstances. This kind of approach would allow the internet rights (for Australia) for a business name to be regulated by the government and reduce issues where organisations of the same name in different geographic regions (within Australia or overseas) compete over online turf. The game industry, which is larger than the movie industry, should be appropriately recognised as a mature and desired industry, with the implementation of an R category to place it inline with the movie classification scheme. National classifications should not be based on the outdated views of a single state Attorney-General, but on community values. Also the industry should see the same support as the movie industry in Australia (or possibly much better considering some of the deplorable funding decisions on Australian movies). This would help broaden Australian participation in this global market and support the development of our entire IT sector. I don't see the same broad benefits for our business performance of keeping a few Australian actors and cameramen in work - their skills are not transferable in the same manner as programmers. Australia also needs to look at where it should NOT regulate. Regulation should be a last resort where the market does not provide equitable means of balance and redress. I believe that Australia has not done too badly in balancing the level of regulation, and should continue to be reluctant to regulate where market forces are working already - such as for internet filtering, where commercial products are readily available to all who want them.