CASA Strikes again!
 

I recently became aware of yet another example of CASA stupidity. It would seem that CASA is threatening to prosecute a GA operator for breaching copyright in CASA product.

The breach in question? This operator is alleged to have downloaded a copy of the DAY VFR syllabus from the CASA web site to a USB and then handed it to one of its students for use during training. CASA have threatened to sue for making "an unauthorised copy".

The stupidity leaves one speechless.:confused:

If this is 100% accurate, and please be 100% sure, to protect yourself, name and shame should work well.

CASA are trying to encourage electronic delivery, printing and selling is not their business.

Promoting safety is.

I surely hope you are wrong...... :uhoh:

That sounds a little strange. As Jabba has pointed out, CASA has always supported the download of their materials. If not, why then make it downloadable in both PDF and RTF format?

And this is from the CASA website on the VFR Day syllabus section, quote;

"The syllabus is provided in adobe acrobat and rich text format (RTF). The latter allows extracts of the syllabus to be downloaded and incorporated into a school's operations manual and/or own training syllabus. "

The impression I get from my limited understanding of the Kiwi scene is that their CAA operate from a position of 'we'll work with you to get the job done safely', promoting education, fostering the passing on of good gen and so on (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Kiwis).

On the other hand, it seems our guys are hell bent on not developing a good working relationship of mutual respect with the aviation community at all, but setting up an adversarial 'them and us' situation. Why, I don't know.

Sure, there are roadshows and all that jazz, but the mistrust that has built up between CASA and the aviating person on the street seems very, very strong.

I would dearly love to see CASA move away from this legislative, corporate monster they appear to be at the moment and become a fair-dinkum mentoring and facilitating organisation, leading from the front as far as safety and standards go. I see this starting with a strong push to work with the flying schools and be involved right from the word go in every pilot's development as a believable and approachable group of experts who know what they're talking about and don't hide behind a smoke screen of legalese.

They still need to carry the big stick and take strong action where it's required (as apparently didn't happen in the Hempel case, discussed at length elsewhere), but with that, set the example to operators by being at pains to show they are on the same side as legitimate business and private aviators who want to do it right.

I may be going off half-cocked here if the thing about the Day VFR syllabus isn't true. If it is, then whoever at CASA is driving the pursuit needs a kick up the arse.

Lexair - yes there is stupids here. And not in CASA.

..and with a posting such as that, I tend to agree .. :rolleyes:

Off subject, but the FAA got in all kinds of problems a number of years ago with just this policy. In supporting the industry, it started turning a blind eye to some of the problems. Took a big stick and a change of procedure to get it back to doing its job.

AOTW = Nail on HEAD! :ok:

Sure, Lodown, I can see there would be the possibility of things getting too 'matey' depending on personalities and individual integrity.

It's a complex issue, of course, but the current climate of mistrust, blame and double standards feels all wrong.

How to fix it is another story - big root-and-branch changes could only come with sufficient political will, and I doubt there's enough votes in it to make ministers sit up and take notice, even when aeroplanes crash. There's a bit of media frenzy for a while, then we return to the status quo.

I call BS, LexAir.

“Prosecution” for breach of copyright? Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Being “sued” for breach of copyright? Maybe. But for downloading “a copy” – one copy – of the VFR Day Syllabus? Give me a break. :=

What’s the real story, LexAir?

BTW everybody else: The ‘dual mandate’ has been debated to death – literally – a long time ago.

Watching paint dry
 

Could be worse. People could have been dowloading the pony pooh below?
(Sorry Blackhand, I know you have an autographed copy!)

Bibliographic information

Title: Law and Sorcery in Papua New Guinea: A Reconsideration of the Relationship Between Law and Custom
Author: Jonathan Aleck
Publisher: Australian National University, 1996
Length: 1108 pages
Subjects: Law
Law and Magic

Well that makes three of us, for even getting involved in this bull****tee about copyright on something you are invited to download and use.

Creamie and co. I refer to my first post......I seriously doubt this has legs. Surely not.

If it does......there is no hope! :uhoh:

There must be a lot more to the story. As much as I will criticise the CASA where it is being crazy, this if at all possible would take the cake, and it just sounds too far fetched.

It's one thing to download, another altogether to charge for the service perhaps?

My guess is; and it is only a guess,that the operator might have been SELLING the syllabus to their clients.....that would be a breach if the Day VFR Syllabus was included in a package they were selling to their clients!:uhoh:

Sounds more likely. Another thing they might be a bit upset about is uncontrolled out of date copies of their docs out there. They might just be saying that the only source for their docs should be directly from their website. I mean, just imagine if someone was using a syllabus downloaded a couple of months ago, that did not refer to (say) the latest incredibly important CTAF changes?:ooh:

Same thing happens even with SBs and ADs... Sometimes they change a date or something minor without necessarily adding an A or letting us know about amendment .01 to the doc and if you are using the one you downloaded yesterday.... These days we need our iPads permanently with us going instantly back to the source.:)

Bullseye!
 

What about downloading pictures of The Skull in his friday hawaiin shirts and distributing them to pubs to place on dart boards? Is that illegal?

I use his picture down on the range as a target.:E
Shrink recommended it for anger management..:}

Folks,
Leave poor Jonathan alone, he has, in fact, some first class law qualifications, quite apart from his PhD. He's a better lawyer than a lot of you blokes give him credit for --- and, at least, he is not anti-aviation.

A PhD is not easily obtained in any filed, it represents a lot of hard work and effort.

Maybe it's even a bit more relevant to the job than a well know techead in Dept, of Communications (or whatever it is properly called) whose' recent PhD is, so I am informed, in something to do with marine biology.

Tootle pip!!

Leadsled,
Yes Jonathon is so well educated in law and common sense that he provides information labelled "repcon material" and identifies the sender to the company concerned!
Sack the man.
Greedy