SPECIAL GUEST JUDGE 

The Hon. Justice Fabian Gleeson
Judge of the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of New South Wales, and 2018 NSW Young Lawyers Patron.

MASTER OF CEREMONIES 

Emily Aitken
Employment and WHS lawyer, Seyfarth Shaw, and Vice Chair, NSW Young Lawyers Workplace and Safety Law Committee.

Further Information

NSW Young Lawyers

• Phone : (02) 9926 0182
• Email: ylgeneral@lawsociety.com.au
• Website: lawsociety.com.au/goldengavel

Chief justice Susan Kiefel has announced that the High Court will hand down its decision on the voluntary same-sex marriage postal survey tomorrow at 2.15pm.

Full reasons will be published later.

Thinking about applying for a Victoria Law Foundation grant? Have you started to get your application together? The Foundation’s 2017/18 General Grants round closes on Monday 28 August.

This year with an increased grant budget, the Foundation is looking to fund projects that will make a greater impact and reach more Victorians.

The Foundation will consider diverse legal projects including research, service delivery, development of legal resources or community legal education. Community organisations may also include capacity-building activities to ensure projects have the greatest chance of success.

There are a number of ways that the Victoria Law Foundation can help you produce the best application and final project. Take advantage of the Foundation’s expertise in plain language, publishing, communications, education and events to help you deliver a successful grant project.

Time is running out.

Contact the Foundation’s grants manager now to discuss your idea:

Grants Manager
Melanie Rygl
Telephone: (03) 9604 8100
Email: grants@victorialawfoundation.org.au
Read more or find out what’s involved in applying for a grant here.

From tomorrow, 1 July 2017, the courts will no longer post hard copies of sealed orders by mail to legal representatives.

All court orders will be signed and sealed electronically and available to download from the Commonwealth Courts Portal available here.

The regime will be extended to all parties from 1 January 2018.

The changes are intended to provide faster and more secure delivery of court orders.

Further Information

Register for the portal, link to your firm and files, set your email notifications, get instant access 24/7 to your court files and download your orders as soon as they are available.

For step-by-step guides to registering, linking your firm, using the portal and accessing orders visit How do I for lawyers.

If you’re already registered and using the Portal see ‘Viewing and downloading orders’ for more details about accessing orders at How do I navigate through the Commonwealth Courts Portal – for lawyers.

This is not a retrospective change. Past orders issued before 1/7/17 may not be available on the Portal. The usual application process for requesting a sealed copy of orders will still be required for past orders.

Have anything you’d like to add to this story? Leave a message in the comments! 

Netflix has increased its prices ahead of the legislative changes which will come into effect on 1 July 2017. The company is using the opportunity presented by the digital tax to hike its prices by an additional margin. From today, Australian subscribers will pay:

• Single-user standard-definition Netflix plan increases by $1 to $9.99 per month, including GST
• Two-user HD plan increases by $2 to $13.99
• Four-user Ultra HD plan increases by $3 to $17.99.

While the estimated $350 million in revenue from the 10% GST charge will go towards state and territory governments, the remainder of the increase will go straight towards feathering Netflix’s nest.

Since launching in 2015 in Australia, Netflix has not changed its pricing.

The company will start sending existing members 30-day notices from 29 June 2017.

Ms Haultain has a background as a senior executive and is a passionate advocate for access to justice. She is Chair of the Board of Management at the Victorian Foundation for the Survivors of Torture and is a former Commissioner with the Victorian Law Reform Commission. With more than a decade’s experience working inside all three levels of government, she also headed up a Premier’s advisory panel on children’s services.

Ms Haultain will lead the Foundation through the next period, which will include a focus on the recommendations arising from the Victorian Government’s Access to Justice Review.

Ms Haultain will join the foundation at the end of July 2017.

The foundation will consider diverse legal projects including research, service delivery, development of legal resources or community legal education. Community organisations may also include capacity-building activities to ensure projects have the greatest chance of success.

Applications close Monday 28 August 2017.

Further Information

Read more or find out what is involved in applying for one of these grants here.

A panel of 14 of Taiwan’s top judges have ruled in favour of same-sex marriage.

In a recent ruling, Taiwan’s highest court decided that current laws preventing same-sex unions were unconstitutional and violated rights to equality.

Contrary to many misleading reports circulating the internet, laws that legalise gay marriage in Taiwan have not come into force yet.

The outcome of this landmark ruling is that parliament has 2-years to amend existing laws to either legalise same-sex marriage or create new civil partnership legislation.

Exactly what changes parliament will make to reflect the ruling is still largely uncertain.

According to BBC news, the LGBT community is hoping for an amendment to existing marriage legislation to include same-sex couples. Such changes would mean that same-sex couples enjoy the same rights as heterosexual couples, including adoption, parenting and inheritance rights as well as the ability to make decisions for each other in the case of a medical emergency.

Some commentators have expressed concerns that parliament will, instead, pass new legislation that recognises same-sex marriage as distinct from opposite sex marriage and that only grants same-sex couples certain rights while withholding others.

If parliament does not meet the 2-year deadline, the court has said that same-sex couples could register to marry based on its recent ruling.

h/t BBC News

It’s why we always ask our monthly interviewees ‘what they listen to’.

Music preferences and listening habits reveal a lot more about you than just your favourite bands or artists. They are a window into your personality, ethnicity, religious views, politics, innermost thoughts and feelings – not to mention your current mood.

Bose understands the value of this information. It’s why the company allegedly purpose built an app to spy on and collect data on the listening habits of its customers and to onsell that private information to third parties.

If a court finds this to be true, it means you can no longer assume that you’re safe and alone in the space between your headphones. While you’ve been blissing out with the latest Father John Misty track, frighteningly, Bose has secretly been tracking you too.

You are what you listen to

A $5 million class-action lawsuit is being brought against Bose, the headphone and speaker giant, for breaching the United States Federal Wiretap Act and Privacy legislation by collecting and selling private information about its customers to third parties without their knowledge or consent.

Introduced in 2016, the company has been using an app named ‘Bose Connect’ – which enables listeners to remotely control particular Bose headphones and speakers from smartphones.

While it is possible to use the headphones without engaging the smartphone app (by using an audio cable or Bluetooth connection) the company actively encourages users to “get the most out of your headphones” and enjoy extra features by downloading the Bose Connect app. This is where the data collection allegedly happens.

The headphone products cited in the lawsuit include QuietComfort 35 headphones, SoundSport Wireless, Sound Sport Pulse Wireless, QuietControl 30, SoundLink Around-Ear Wireless Headphones II, and SoundLink Color II.

Why is this a big deal? 

The class action against Bose alleges that ‘Bose Connect’ was intentionally designed and programmed to secretly collect customers’ usage data, including:

• titles of music, audio tracks and podcasts
• artist and album information

A customer’s registration information (including product serial numbers, full names, email addresses and telephone numbers) along with personal music listening histories and habits are allegedly collected by Bose, allowing the company to put together detailed profiles about its customers.

According to the complaint, listeners are not given a notification or warning that their usage is being monitored and collected in real time and there is no disclosure that listener’s data, along with other personal identifiers, is automatically sent to third-party companies—including a data miner—without its customers’ knowledge or consent.

According to the complaint:

One’s personal audio selections – including music, radio broadcast, Podcast, and lecture choices – provide an incredible amount of insight into his or her personality, behavior, political views, and personal identity. In fact, numerous scientific studies show that musical preferences reflect explicit characteristics such as age, personality, and values, and can likely even be used to identify people with autism spectrum conditions.

And that’s just a small sampling of what can be learned from one’s music preferences. When it comes other types of audio tracks, the personality, values, likes, dislikes, and preferences of the listener are more self-evident. For example, a person that listens to Muslim prayer services through his headphones or speakers is very likely a Muslim, a person that listens to the Ashamed, Confused, And In the Closet Podcast is very likely a homosexual in need of a support system, and a person that listens to The Body’s HIV/AIDS Podcast is very likely an individual that has been diagnosed and is living with HIV or AIDS. None of [Bose’s] customers could have ever anticipated that these types of music and audio selections would be recorded and sent to, of all people, a third party data miner for analysis.”

If the allegations are accurate, this not only violates the privacy rights of consumers but also a number of Federal and State laws in the United States, including the Federal Wiretap Act. According to the complaint:

[Bose] never obtained consent from any of its customers before intercepting, monitoring, collecting, and transmitting their Media Information. To the contrary, [Bose] concealed its actual data collection policies from its customers knowing that (i) a speaker or headphone product that monitors, collects, and transmits users’ private music and audio tracks to any third party—let alone a data miner—is worth significantly less than a speaker or headphone product that does not, and (ii) few, if any, of its customers would have purchased a Bose Wireless Product in the first place had they known that it would monitor, collect, and transmit their Media Information.”

If Bose is found by the court to be in breach, in this case, and if similar data collection has occurred in Australia, it is likely that similar litigation will follow.

What do you think? Is music an inherently personal and private experience, or just another convenient way for companies to use our data for profit? Let us know in the comments!

Three days ago, April 8, marked a day that will live on in the hearts and minds of Empire Records fanatics the world over.

A day in 1995 where kids rocked out to AC/DC at work:

When everybody said the first thing that came into their head:

A time when it was still okay to tell someone they had terrible taste in music:

When Renee Zellweger danced in an apron, putting the colour o-range firmly on the map:

A period when crashing live newscasts to stop treasured record stores from closing was advocated:

When bringing Rex his lunch was the ultimate teen dream:

And, most importantly, when Rex Manning rocked a pirate shirt while sashaying his hips in a way that made smart girls stupid:

That’s right, it was Rex Manning Day!

But today, April 11, marks an equally important date in history.

A day that it took until 2017 to officially recognise as

INTERNATIONAL BE KIND TO LAWYERS DAY!

Yes, we’re yelling

By all accounts, it’s a day meant to recognise all the lovely clever things your lawyer does for you. Whether it’s your partner, sibling, parent, friend, co-worker, boss or hired lawyer, consider holding off on the lawyer jokes for 24 hours and telling them something nice that puffs their ego. It’s an easy way to get involved and, for once, it costs you nothing!

NB: Suggest complimenting their brilliant legal mind.

However you choose to celebrate that special law student or lawyer in your life, at the very least show them some love by shouting them a gin & tonic tonight.

It’s only Tuesday, but Lord knows it’s already been a long week.

How are you planning to celebrate International Be Kind To Lawyers Day? Let us know in the comments!

Code for Australia (CfA) and Victoria Legal Aid (VLA) have just released a new online tool designed to make it easier for community members to gain access to legal assistance.

All code published by the CfA team is open source, meaning it can be replicated in other organisations who have similar needs. The code can be found on Github.

• Legal Aid Checker
• Code for Australia
• Victoria Legal Aid

Have something to add to this story? Leave a comment!

The State’s most recent efforts this week have been much more successful – the Justice and Community Safety Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) that passed on the 14th February 2017 amended the Civil Unions Act 2012 to:

allow for the automatic recognition of same-sex relationships that have been formally recognised in other jurisdictions as civil unions under Territory laws”.

Prior to this amendment, same-sex couples who married in another jurisdiction had to register their relationship upon entry or re-entry into the ACT, where heterosexual marriages have always been automatically recognised.

This means while same-sex marriages still cannot be performed in the ACT, the Territory will now recognise those that have occurred in other jurisdictions where such marriages are formally recognised. ACT Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay stated:

The amendments to the Civil Unions Act demonstrate this Government’s commitment to building a Canberra that is progressive, inclusive, and people-centred”.

This is representative of the signalling power that State legislation has, and this is clearly not an area where the ACT Government is going to let the Federal Government drop the ball. As Mr Ramsay further asserted:

Despite this setback, the ACT Government continues to support the recognition of same-sex relationships where possible, and we will continue to advocate for the Federal Government to act on marriage equality.”

These amendments follow the passage of similar legislation in South Australia last year. They were introduced in that State in response to the grief caused when a United Kingdom spouse whose same-sex partner died tragically while the couple were on honeymoon in Australia. The surviving spouse was told that the South Australian death certificate would not acknowledge their marriage, which was recognised in the UK.

The ACT Government is clearly committed to affording as many rights as possible to same-sex couples within the restrictions of Federal law.  In the words of Mr Ramsay:

No one should be made to feel different or lesser because of who they love and we are committed to ensuring that all Canberrans have the ability to express their love and commitment in the eyes of the law.”

The passage of these amendments is not only an important step towards equal recognition but also sends a clear message to the Federal Government that there is a growing impetus behind marriage law reform. Perhaps if more States and Territories make similar legislative changes, the Federal government will take action.

Starting a business is a calculated risk.

It involves weighing relative costs and benefits, assessing known financial risks, seeking advice from trusted sources, accepting uncertainty and pushing ahead anyway.

Most startup owners are big advocates of ‘when you need it’ learning. This usually involves learning something ‘on the run’ and finding out what you need to know about a specific subject area right before you need that information.

However, when it comes to the legal obligations involved in setting up and running a safe business, ‘when you need it’ learning doesn’t really cut it. This is largely because you need to be aware of your legal duties towards your business and your staff in order to actively comply with them.

It’s a lesson that was hard won by RM Williams earlier this year when the chain was fined $90,000 for breaching the Work Health and Safety Act after a worker was seriously injured, partly due to a lack of appropriate training.

This lack of formal workplace safety training can have a significant financial and human cost for businesses. In most states, businesses can face up to $3 million in fines for breaching workplace health and safety legislation.

CourseGenius And Compliance Training

Launching today, CourseGenius aims to fill a gap in the market by providing accessible and affordable online safety and compliance training courses to small to medium-sized businesses (SMEs) in Australia.

The WA-based company offers a platform for SMEs to create and deliver custom online training programs.

With additional topics to follow, the suite of compliance courses provides training in three core areas:

1. Workplace Health and Safety Fundamentals;
2. Workplace Bullying and Harassment; and
3. Social Media and Electronic Communication.

Developed by Australian law firm People + Culture Strategies, the courses are legally compliant and tailored for Australian workplaces.

Co-founder and lawyer, Sarah Mateljan, was able to see the significant risk and potential cost to SMEs who fail to run formal compliance training:

We’ve listened to our customers and we know it’s hard for them to find engaging and legally compliant training content on a budget. Our new suite of compliance courses solves this problem by providing interactive, legally authored online training on-demand. Our customers, such as ECOYA are well placed to make this move as they are more agile than larger enterprises, and can more easily adopt new technologies to solve problems.”

The CourseGenius compliance courses were exactly what I was after. I oversee manufacturing where compliance and training is of critical importance. Being a medium sized business, we are good at implementing practical training elements however this not always reflected on paper. If I had to create the program myself, not only would it take me two or three days to prepare the material but I couldn’t be entirely sure that the content is correct and current.” 

Further Information

To sign up for a demonstration visit CourseGenius.

In the latest music industry lawsuit to hit headlines, Bruno Mars and Mark Ronson are being sued for copyright infringement by 80s electro-funk band Collage, according to TMZ.

Collage claims that the hit track “Uptown Funk” released by Bruno Mars and Mark Ronson in 2014 is a thinly veiled replica of Collage’s 1983 hit “Young Girls” and that the duo reproduced the song’s rhythm, harmony, melody and structure.

It’s not the first time Ronson and Mars have faced legal action over “Uptown Funk”. Earlier this year, The Sequence argued that their 1979 song, “Funk You Up” had been copied, but did not pursue legal action. Last year, writers from The Gap Band successfully joined the list of songwriting credits on “Uptown Funk” for its similarities to their 1979 hit “Oops Upside Your Head.”

According to the complaint (via Pitchfork)

Upon information and belief, many of the main instrumental attributes and themes of “Uptown Funk” are deliberately and clearly copied from “Young Girls,” including, but not limited to, the distinct funky specifically noted and timed consistent guitar riffs present throughout the compositions, virtually if not identical bass notes and sequence, rhythm, structure, crescendo of horns and synthesizers rendering the compositions almost indistinguishable if played over each other and strikingly similar if played in consecutively.

Mars and Ronson have previously listed early 1980s Minneapolis electro-funk soul music as among key influences that inspired the song “Uptown Funk.”

Collage are seeking damages and profits.

Listen to side-by-side comparisons of the two songs below:

Too close to call? You be the judge.

h/t Pitchfork.

Further Information for Musicians

To find out more about your options in Australia where another musician infringes your copyright:

• Legal Rights Where Your Song Is Used Without Permission