71._org_ Firefly Education

Full name: Firefly Education

If you are making this submission on behalf of an organisation, please provide the name: Firefly Education

Question 1: 
N/A
Question 2: 
N/A
Question 3: 
N/A
Question 4: 
N/A
Question 5: 
N/A
Question 6: 
N/A
Question 7: 
N/A
Question 8: 
N/A
Question 9: 
N/A
Question 10: 
N/A
Question 11: 
N/A
Question 12: 
N/A
Question 13: 
N/A
Question 14: 
N/A
Question 15: 
N/A
Question 16: 
N/A
Question 17: 
N/A
Question 18: 
N/A
Question 19: 
N/A
Question 20: 
N/A
Question 21: 
N/A
Question 22: 
N/A
Question 23: 
N/A
Question 24: 
N/A
Question 25: 
N/A
Question 26: 
N/A
Question 27: 
N/A
Question 28: 
N/A
Question 29: 
Authors and publishers have long been the driving force of innovation in the educational system by providing a wide range of educational texts, resources and online materials for teachers and students. The survival of educational authors is dependent on schools and parents purchasing these publications and the collection of fees from the education statutory licence. 
Many schools consider themselves as ‘non-textbook’ or ’paperless’ institutions in the hope that teachers will construct their own programs to suit their clients. While this is pedagogically admirable, teachers generally gather print resources that are appropriate and copy them for their students. The strength of the education statutory licence is that it offers authors and publishers fair renumeration for their intellectual property. 
As a publisher, we are accommodating the desire of teachers to also be able to source materials online. We see the ‘equitable renumeration’ provided by the education statutory licence applying to the online materials just as it does to the print materials. It does not make sense that the intellectual property of authors is considered ‘free’ just because the content is available in digital format. No publisher will be able to attract authors to write materials for digital delivery when the education sector regards the content as being ‘free for use’ in schools. 
Over the years we have witnessed the intellectual property rights of authors being breached by school personnel copying their works without regard to the copyright restrictions. In fact many teachers think that copying 10% of the content under what is deemed a ‘reasonable portion’ or ‘fair dealing’, can be applied in term 1, then again in term 2 and so on until most of the content of the title is copied. The danger for us as a publisher is that teachers will consider that the digital materials available on the internet are exempt from the ‘reasonable portion’ restrictions. 
Question 30: 
The business models of most educational publishers are changing from relying solely on print publications to ones that offer both print and digital content. What isn’t changing is the value of the author’s intellectual property in those publications. This is why the education statutory licence should not be waived for digital delivery of content and that ‘free use’ should not apply. 
As a publisher, we offer some digital content that can be used for ‘free’ by teachers. This content is marked ‘free for use in schools’. All other content which the author relies on for payment should be covered by the education statutory licence. 
We believe that the uses of copyright material covered by the education statutory licence should not be covered by a free-use exception. 
Question 31: 
N/A
Question 32: 
N/A
Question 33: 
N/A
Question 34: 
N/A
Question 35: 
N/A
Question 36: 
N/A
Question 37: 
N/A
Question 38: 
N/A
Question 39: 
N/A
Question 40: 
N/A
Question 41: 
Question 42: 
Question 43: 
Question 44: 
Question 45: 
Question 46: 
Question 47: 
Question 48: 
Question 49: 
Question 50: 
Question 51: 
Question 52: 
Question 53: 
Question 54: 
Question 55: 
Other comments: 
File 1: 
File 2: