The Productivity Commission’s has responded to over 270 submissions to its inquiry into parallel-import restrictions for books by producing a a ‘discussion draft’ containing several recommendations.
Its central recommendation is that parallel imports ‘should apply for 12 months from the date of first publication of a book in Australia. Thereafter, parallel importation should be freely permitted.’
Scribe’s publisher and managing director, Henry Rosenbloom, today described the draft report as ‘a deeply cynical and political document.’
‘Its key recommendation is unworkable and absurd, and is based on neo-liberal theory and not industry evidence,’ he said.
‘It is a Clayton’s recommendation. It pretends to retain territorial copyright while setting up conditions that would effectively destroy it - and the Australian publishing industry.
‘It is deeply misleading about the US and UK laws on this subject: it describes these two biggest English-language territories as ‘also having parallel-import restrictions, although without time requirements for first publication’. This is a bizarre way to obscure the fact that the UK and UK don’t limit parallel imports – they prohibit them.
‘The commission concedes that the timely and wide availability of new books is not a problem, and the most it can offer about prices is a mealy-mouthed comment that parallel-import restrictions ‘put upward pressure on prices’ (in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary). What then is the basis for its recommendations?
‘The only conclusion can be that the commission is trying to square a circle. It has been tasked to abolish territorial copyright, and is itching to do so, but the mountain of submissions presented to its enquiry have denied it the evidence it needs. So its recommendation is a fig-leaf; beneath it is a hostile intent of highly disturbing proportions.
‘It is also outrageous that the commission made its interim report available to selected media before sending it to those individuals and organisations who have a direct stake in this debate, and who put so much thought and effort into writing submissions to the commission’s inquiry.’
News