Australia Pays $20 Million To Buy The Copyright Of Aboriginal Flag, But It's Still Not Public Domain
from the just-ridiculous dept
Over a decade ago, we wrote about how Google had to edit out the Australian Aboriginal flag from a logo because of copyright concerns. An 11-year-old girl had won a contest to design a Google logo for Australia Day, and her logo included a simple drawing of the popular Aboriginal flag. Harold Thomas created a (fairly simple) flag design "as a symbol of unity and national identity" for the Aboriginal people in Australia. The flag became quite popular... and then Thomas basically became a copyright landlord, demanding payment for pretty much any usage.
In 2019, Thomas did a big licensing deal with a clothing company and proceeded to send out a bunch of cease-and-desist letters to others. It got so bad that the Australian Senate sought to have the government figure out a way to make sure the public could use the flag.
Apparently it took over two years, but the "deal" has been worked out -- and it involves the Australian government paying over $20 million to basically buy out the copyright and the former licensing deals, but that still doesn't mean the flag is truly in the public domain:
Mr Thomas will retain moral rights over the flag, but has agreed to give up copyright in return for all future royalties the Commonwealth receives from commercial flag sales to be put towards the ongoing work of NAIDOC.
A commercial company will keep its exclusive licence to be able to manufacture Aboriginal flags for commercial use, but the government said the company would not stop people from making their own flags for personal use.
So, given that he retains the moral rights, that suggests he will still have the power to stop anyone from using the flag in a way that he, personally, disapproves of. And the fact that there's still a license for commercial use, means that the government is still effectively enforcing the copyright.
So, in the end this was $20 million of taxpayer money... to basically pledge not to go after people for personal use.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the flag would be managed in a similar manner to the Australian national flag, where its use is free, but must be presented in a "respectful and dignified way".
"All Australians can now put the Aboriginal Flag on apparel such as sports jerseys and shirts, it can be painted on sports grounds, included on websites, in paintings and other artworks, used digitally and in any other medium without having to ask for permission or pay a fee," Mr Morrison said.
"We’ve freed the Aboriginal Flag for Australians."
With a whole bunch of caveats. If it's used in a manner that someone disapproves of, you better believe that it won't be seen as "free" for use. Hell, even the Google example from a decade ago probably wouldn't work, because I would bet the Australian government would argue that was a "commercial" use.
Mr Thomas said the flag's design was his dreaming story.
"The Flag represents the timeless history of our land and our people’s time on it. It is an introspection and appreciation of who we are," he said.
"It draws from the history of our ancestors, our land, and our identity and will honour these well into the future."
Seems just slightly ironic for a landlord who claimed ownership of a concept and then locked people out would call that a representative sample of "the timeless history of our land."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: aboriginal flag, australia, copyright, harold thomas, licensing, moral rights, public domain
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
By "timeless" he probably mean "their aspiration for all (future) times".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Seems just slightly ironic for a landlord who claimed ownership of a concept and then locked people out would call that a representative sample of "the timeless history of our land.""
Seems pretty on point for how native/colonial relations traditionally function, albeit aimed from a different source.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stapling more rights on copyright... what could go wrong...
oh.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wouldn't a flag be a fact? Maybe that's a red flag.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's already a knock off
And of course, because history wouldn't be made without it, it was copyrighted... which is trying it's best to be "timeless".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It's already a knock off
The damn thing should be left to the sands of time. As it's creator clearly wants it to be.
Instead of spending $20 million to not really allow public use of the damn thing. They should have spent that money on creating a new flag with a CC0 permanently attached to it. At least then the Australian taxpayers would have gotten something useful out of the deal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: It's already a knock off
I was just about to say the same thing.
Tell the guy to get bent then make a new flag and put it directly into the public domain. All the problems are solved and there's no need to pay extortionist amounts of money to a greedy jackass.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: It's already a knock off
Does this mean that copyrights were the original NFTs?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Irony, surely not?
And there are those who say that Americans don't get irony: <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1">Title 4 USC chapter 1</a>
[ link to this | view in thread ]