Share this post!

On 2 November, Dick Smith replied to my latest email to him (see my previous posts to this blog). On 3 November — Melbourne Cup day — I replied. Then he and I had a further exchange. Here is that correspondence.

Dear Henry

Thanks for your email of Friday 30 October (7.46pm). It looks as if self-interest is strong and booming in the publishing industry. Good on you! That’s the whole basis for Capitalism. I still, however, have a feeling that the advantages are mainly going to you and similar businesses, not really to the consumer.

You state –

instead, from our understanding that a large source of our business will be removed if we are unable to have guaranteed access to our own territory when we acquire overseas-originated books or sell Australian books to overseas territories.

This actually sounds to me like the globalised marketplace. Yes, lots of people fought against it for many years, but it seems to be a fact of life – for just about everything except books and a few other selected products.

I imagine you accept the benefits offered by the global economy in everything you buy – that’s why I have always supported competition and I have never supported import restrictions to prevent competition.

I have a feeling that you don’t really know what the marketplace would be like with the restrictions removed. That would be because you have always worked in a marketplace which has been restrictive.

I am different to you – I just love competition. To me, not having competition would be like cheating at sport, and I wouldn’t be in that.

Regards Dick.

Dear Dick

Thank you for your reply of 2 November.

I think I can see why we’ll never agree: you think books are products, like widgets or shirts. They’re not.

Even a widget can only be manufactured legally because a patent was originally issued to its designer or inventor. A book is even more complicated, because it can only come into existence once an author has created it. The author is protected by copyright, but he or she can only exercise this right by licensing territorial copyright. And publishers can only justify risking their resources if the territorial copyright they acquire is recognised by the law of the land.

Your argument, ultimately, is with copyright itself. There’s no doubt there would be a totally free trade in books – a competitive marketplace of the kind you love – if there were no underlying copyright protection for them. There’d just be a small problem, though: there’d be no authors, no royalties, and no publishers.

Best wishes

Henry Rosenbloom

Dear Henry

Actually, you are wrong. I totally support strong copyright laws and protection of authors. “The author is protected by copyright, but he or she can only exercise this right by licensing territorial copyright” (my underlining).

I understand you have this belief, however it is not based in fact.

Because of globalisation we tend to have a world marketplace now. I do realise that there has been an attempt to try and keep copyright to a particular territory. However, what size should the territory be? Should it be by suburb? Obviously, that would be ridiculous. Now, with modern communication and internet, I believe authors can be protected by copyright and, on average, they will receive more royalties than when the marketplace is restricted.

Once again I say that this, of course, will not help your business which relies on territorial restrictions. Surely you can see, that with the modern internet and communications, changes will have to take place.

Regards Dick Smith

Dear Dick

You can’t protect authors’ interests without providing territorial copyright to them and their publishers. That’s why virtually all Australian authors and their agents strongly support retention of the current system.

Nor, in the book marketplace, is there any confusion about what territorial copyright means: it refers to the territory controlled by nation-states, in which the rule of law applies.

Try telling the Americans and the British that they should abandon territorial copyright. They’d laugh you out of the room.

By the way, I’ve had many conversations with US and UK publishers and literary agents about this subject over the last year or so — including with some who would theoretically benefit from the change you support. Not one of them could understand how an Australian government would even contemplate abandoning territorial copyright.

I don’t believe that the internet will weaken territorial ties. If anything, I think it will strengthen them, as rights-holders become even more cautious about the terms and conditions under which they license those rights.

Best wishes

Henry Rosenbloom