Worth watching and mostly good.
But a specious argument (starts about 1.50) reveals a mindset:
Do you know if you walk around town with a camera you’d be filming a lot of trademarked signs, You might have to get a permit for that. You might have to pay a licence fee for that.
Now do you think that money gets passed onto the artists? It doesn’t. It goes straight into the pockets of the multinationals. The law isn’t there to protect us who create content either. They’re [sic] there to help the people who make money off us and who make money from the public. And that’s the big faceless conglomerates around the world.
While I agree with a lot of the sentiment of the clip, and the stupidity of Section 92A (internet disconnection on accusation) it’s a shame this is being portrayed this alarmist way: “Whistling Happy Birthday in public would be a copyright crime.” That’s not the same as the day care centre being told to take down its Disney characters (a request which was, let’s face it, stupid).
But language like, “the big faceless conglomerates around the world” is just appealing to the Greenpeace demographic … big = bad.
The Free Trade Agreement linkage/shilly-shally is probably imaginary, or pre-emptive weasel-ing by Govt departments/diplomats seeking to earn brownie points. Or vaguely mafia-like behaviour by the local agencies with no basis in reality.