‘The management committee met through December and decided in January to step away from its previous position,' ABA CEO Malcolm Neil told WBN. As the Association's submission to the Productivity Commission's study of book importation laws states: ‘After extensive consultation with its members the management committee has resolved that the ABA position established in 2001 in support of the open market no longer reflected the needs and views of its diverse membership.'
While acknowledging that ‘there are a number of members who continue to advocate for the open market' the ABA submission states that it ‘considers the uncertainty delivered by the removal of territorial copyright to be of too great a risk to our developing independent publishing industry, particularly in light of the business models of the most successful of these publishers and their reliance on the value of territorial copyright'.
While the ABA is no longer in support of an open market, however, it stresses that current practices ‘do not provide sufficient competitive pressure to deliver best service, speed of supply and best price for both booksellers and readers'.
Canadian-style regulatory approach should replace current legislation
Drawing on the Canadian system (and May 2008 amendments here), the ABA proposes the introduction in Australia of a ‘set of governing regulations' (the criteria for which should be established by an industry working group overseen by an independent party) that will give the industry the capacity to adapt to changing technologies, reading formats and markets, without ‘continual recourse to legislative change' through the Copyright Act.
The ABA envisages a regulatory approach ‘containing performance criteria to maintain copyright' that will ‘ensure competitive pressures on price and speed of supply'.
Neil told WBN that such criteria should include a ‘straight seven-day rule' replacing the current 30-/90-day rule, as well as ‘some form of cap on price', meaning that in order to retain copyright on a title a publisher must be able to supply the title within seven days and within a certain price.
‘The ABA contends that the establishment of performance criteria will ensure that publishers will make best business decisions on each title allowing the importation of those books not considered "core business" or profitable,' stated the submission.
Maree McCaskill, CEO of the Australian Publishers Association (APA), which strongly supports the retention of parallel importation restrictions, told WBN the APA was open to discussing new supply chain models.
'I doubt that it is workable,' she said of the ABA proposal, 'but I guess this is the sort of discussion on supply chain efficiencies we would anticipate having going forward if territorial copyright is maintained.'
Dymocks remains in favour of open market
The Dymocks chain is among the ABA members still supporting the removal of parallel importation restrictions.
‘An open market for books will lead to lower prices and quicker availability. This benefits consumers,' Dymocks CEO Don Grover told WBN.
‘We believe the costs incurred by the community through the prevention of parallel imported books--higher prices, less availability and concentration of market power in the hands of publishers--greatly outweigh the alleged benefits to authors and publishers,' he said.
‘We believe the impact of a free market on authors will be minimal. It has been grossly exaggerated by authors and publishers.'
Authors against changes
The Australian Society of Authors (ASA) has said it is ‘stunned' by the number of authors who have signed a petition opposing changes to Australia's book market.
More than 700 authors have put their names to a petition calling on the Productivity Commission to ‘reject completely the abolition of territorial copyright' in Australia.
‘Australian authors have convincingly demonstrated their complete opposition to an open market for books in Australia,' said ASA executive director Jeremy Fisher. ‘In this they have been supported by the New Zealand Society of Authors, whose members have suffered from an open market there, and the UK Society of Authors where the market, as in the USA, remains closed.'
Submissions still being processed
The deadline for submisions to the Productivity Commission's study was yesterday, 20 January. The Productivity Commission has posted 72 of these submissions, although WBN understands a significant number were received late yesterday. Productivity Commission research manager Tom Nankivell told WBN these late submissions would appear on the Commission's website within the coming week.
All parties to make a submission will be listed on the website in due course, although the content of confidential submissions will not be accessible.
The Productivity Commission will now consider the submissions ahead of a draft report and draft recommendations to be released by mid-March.
This draft report will be followed by further industry consultation. For more information, or to view the processed submissions, view the Productivity Commission website here.
