Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 6:14:33 to 6:18:33
The ABC explains its processes for monitoring and protecting intellectual property, specifically regarding the character Bluey and its use in political advertisements.
Topics: Copyright, Government legal services
Speakers: Hugh Marks, Senator Varun Ghosh
Um uh we it is it can be difficult, obviously, um, to do. There is um particularly uh uh a more difficult environment when it goes to social media. Um there are tools that we can use, particularly with YouTube to register IP uh as owned by the ABC and uh to and and YouTube and Google will act on that um to ensure that you know breaches are uh notified to us. Um other environments are more difficult for us to be able to get that information. Um obviously in a mainstream media when we're made aware of things, then obviously we can take action, but you know, there's no automatic notification telling us that IP has been infringed.
And so you would register kind of major ABC IP with YouTube, uh, perhaps flagship shows, perhaps iconic shows that the ABC is registered like Blueing?
Well, Bluey would be a bit of a different example. We don't own the IP, that's owned by an independent producer based in Queensland, so that would be their step to take that action rather than ours in that particular case.
Does the ABC have processes or procedures to protect its own copyright once once that use is discovered?
Yes, Senator, if again if it's uh um ABC copyright action, uh copyright um then we are and we will consider whether there's been an infringement and take action on the case of uh ABC licensed copyright, such as that in Bluey. Um that is something that we would have to work in conjunction with the IP owner to take that action.
Okay, so you know political cartoon released uh by Paul Inhanson's One Nation Party on or around the 18th of October 2024. It was called the State of Melbourne. I've said it on YouTube. Um the cartoon character Bluey is depicted, identified by name, and then is shown driving an SUV over running over former Premier Daniel Andrews and then reversing over him a number of times. Uh did the ABC have discussions about licensing that content to Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party?
Not that I'm aware of, Senator.
Were you aware of this cartoon?
Only recently, Senator have come to my attention.
And you don't know whether the ABC was involved in discussions about licensing it?
The ABC would not have been involved in that discussion, Senator.
Did Paul Enhancers One Nation Party seek your permission to use that content in that way?
No, Senator.
Okay. Did Paul Enhancers One Nation pay you or the independent licenceholder for the use of Bluey's likeness in that context?
Um certainly not the ABC, and I would assume not the independent production company or BBC Studios, who, as we all know, unfortunately is the distributor of that content. But they would have had to have in that case, either the BBC or the independent producer should have consulted the ABC before any such licence of copyright would have uh occurred. So I think I can assume that no such discussion happened.
So you have a right to be consulted in that context because it's licensed content.
Correct, Senator.
Okay. Well, in light of that, what is the ABC doing about this?
Well, Senator Um uh first step is to consider whether there is a legal right um uh for uh that character to be used in that way. Um I struggle to ascertain whether there will be a legal right from my uh legal background. Um could only assume that there would be some fair dealing, which might be satire or parody might be. But Senator, they're not it's not a parody of any bluey work. It's not um a minor use of uh the IP. Um in my view, it is an infringement of the intellectual property number one, but it's also a shocking use of uh you know Australia's most loved character. In fact, probably the globally most loved character in a video um that that is both you know shocking and and disrespectful to the children of Australia who love that character so much. So, you know, I can't I can't substantiate it either legally or on the basis of its usage.