ET CETERA ET CETERA ET CETERA
Law in the Spotlight
INTRODUCTION
EtCeteraistheflagshippublicationoftheDeakinLawStudents'Society(DLSS) Itseeksto reflect the Deakin Law School zeitgeist of the time, and resonates with the interests of DeakinLawstudents Itaimstoprovokethoughtfuldiscussiononissuesrelevanttoour readersasstudents,futurelegalprofessionalsandcitizensoftheworld.
Media,arts,andcultureareconstantlyevolving,andthelawmustadaptalongsidethese changes. As digital spaces expand and creative industries continue to transform, it is increasingly important for legal frameworks to respond to emerging challenges and opportunities.ThiseditionofEtCeteraexplorestherelationshipbetweenlawandthese fields,bringingtogetherarangeofthoughtfulcontributions.Weencourageyoutoengage withthesearticlesandconsiderhowtheycandeepenyourunderstandingandinformyour ownadvocacy.
EDITORIAL
DiyaMatthew SithmiPathiraja
VickyLu
GraceRooney
EditorinChiefandDesign
Editor Design Design
CONTRIBUTORS
FreyaHalse KalarniOrr
KateHaddock
PhillipHayes
ChrisPrimmer
NatashaPerry
MoiraMcKenzie
MatildaMcDonell
TahliaMiller-Dietrich
JessicaO’Connor
We extend our deepest gratitude to Gadens and Marshalls+Dent+Wilmoth Lawyers whose generous sponsorship and continued support of the DLSS have made this publication possible.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY
WeacknowledgetheTraditionalOwnersofthelandonwhichtheDLSSisfounded,the WurundjeriPeopleoftheKulinNation.Werecognisetheircontinuedconnectiontothe landandwaters WepayourrespectstoWurundjeriElderspastandpresentandextend thisrespecttoAboriginalandTorresStraitEldersandpeoplefromothercommunities.
ABOUT THE DEAKIN LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY
TheDLSSisoneofDeakinUniversity’soldestandlargeststudentsocieties.Wearea student-runorganisationwhichaimstoassistDeakinlawstudentsinmakingthemostof theirtimeatlawschool.Acrossourportfolios,weworktoprovidearangeofeventsand servicestoassistyouateverystageofyourdegree.Whetheryouwanttoimproveyour gradesormakenewfriends,theDLSSisyourone-stopshopforallthingslawatDeakin FormoreinformationyoucanfindtheDLSSonInstagram,Facebook,TikTok,LinkedIn, orviaourwebsite
DISCLAIMER
ThispublicationisprovidedfreeofchargebytheDeakinLawStudents’Society Any opinionsexpressedinthispublicationarenottobeheldasthoseoftheDLSS,Deakin LawSchoolorDeakinUniversity.TheDLSS,DeakinLawSchoolandDeakinUniversity donotnecessarilyendorsetheseopinions;theybelongsolelytotheauthors
Thispublicationissubjecttocopyright.ExceptwherepermittedundertheCopyright Act, no part of this publication may, in any form or by any means (electronic or otherwise)bereproducedorstoredinaretrievalsystemortransmittedbyanyprocess, withoutpriorwrittenconsentfromtheDLSS.
DIRECTOR’S FOREWORD
DIYA MATTHEW
2026 Director of Communications
The law’s place within media, arts, and culture has never been more visible or more tested than it is today. From the content we stream and share, to the way creators build careers and audiences, legal frameworks are being pushed to respond to industries that evolve almost as quickly as they are consumed. Questions of ownership, expression, reputation, and responsibility are no longer confined to legal settings; they are increasingly negotiated in everyday digital and cultural spaces, unfolding across screens and online platforms.
This Et Cetera edition, Law in the Spotlight, examines these intersections, drawing together perspectives from media law, entertainment, intellectual property, and sports law to consider how legal questions both influence and are shaped by today’s media landscape. The publication reflects a field in constant evolution, with contributions exploring how the law is adapting to technology, and global reach Across these pages, it becomes clear that the law is deeply embedded in these industries, shaping how stories are told, how rights are protected, and how individuals and organisations navigate increasingly public and connected spaces. It also serves as a resource for students and early career practitioners, offering insight into how these areas of law intersect and operate in practice
This edition would not have been possible without the dedication and exceptional work of my officers, Sithmi, Vicky, and Grace, whose care and commitment have brought this publication to fruition. Their dedication to fostering student insight into the relationship between law and the media is reflected in the quality and integrity of the work presented here.
I would also like to sincerely thank all of our contributors for generously taking the time to share their insights and expertise. Their thoughtful contributions have enriched this edition and brought depth and perspective to the discussions within it
My sincere thanks go to our sponsors, Gadens and Marshalls+Dent+Wilmoth, whose generosity and commitment to supporting discussion in the law of the creative and media sectors have made this publication possible.
Finally, I would like to thank you, the reader, and hope this edition encourages you to think more critically about the role of law in the media and cultural spaces that shape our everyday experiences.
OFFICERS’ FOREWORD SITHMI, VICKY AND GRACE
2026 Communication Officers
The first edition of Et Cetera 2026 navigates Law in the Spotlight where we explore the evolving role of legal frameworks as they enhance in order to adapt to the ever changing developments in media, entertainment and online spaces. The way media and technology has shaped law around us is becoming increasingly relevant and significant in today’s digital world.
Therefore, we are incredibly privileged and proud to present you with ten articles, each offering a unique perspective across a diverse range of fields spanning defamation law, entertainment law, sports law, and intellectual property law We believe these pieces would inspire you and provide a deeper understanding into these areas.
We would also like to acknowledge our Director of Communications, Diya, for her continuous guidance, support and dedication throughout the creation and production of this publication Her leadership and vision have been integral to shaping this edition and we’re incredibly grateful for her ongoing commitment and efforts to the Communications portfolio.
It has been an exceptionally rewarding process being involved in the creation of this edition, from finding contributors and interviewing them to designing and editing the articles.
We would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to our contributors, whose time, expertise, and dedication have made this publication both insightful and engaging. Their efforts have been instrumental in bringing this edition to life, and their willingness to share their experiences and perspectives has greatly enriched its content.
Finally, our thanks extends to our readers. We hope this edition not only resonates but also offers meaningful insight, helping to bridge the gap between academic study and the development of rewarding and impactful career pathways, much like those of our outstanding contributors.
BY Freya halse
BY Kalarni Orr
ENTERTAINMENT LAW IN THE SPOTLIGHT:
How Are Legal Frameworks Adapting to Shifts in the Industry?
FREYA HALSE | ENTERTAINMENT LAWYER
MARSHALLS+DENT+WILMOTH
Email: fhalse@mdlawcom au
LAWYERS
What is entertainment law?
Entertainment law is a broad area of law covering things like filmmaking, broadcasting, defamation and everything in between. At MDW, we primarily operate in the branch of the law relating to the rights involved with the process of turning creative ideas into tangible works that are then commercialised. We act for independent film and television producers (both fiction and non-fiction content), studios, streamers and financiers, as well as writers, directors and other creatives The most substantial part of our work is helping producers to close complex multiparty film finance transactions, aligning competing commercial interests between key stakeholders (often across borders) to enable producers to obtain cash flow and produce their films.
The producer’s legal obligations are, first and foremost, created by legislation and common law Legislated areas of law that are relevant to filmmaking in Australia include, but are certainly not limited to: intellectual property, tax, banking, employment, corporations, and administrative/public law. Of course, common law is integral to the interpretation of the legislation, and all of this informs the contracts for the film, which are arguably the most important piece of the puzzle.
Contracts as the primary legal framework for film finance transactions
Film financing is often fragmented, with many parties (let’s call them “Transaction Parties”) coming together to provide the cash and skills required to develop, produce, distribute and exhibit a film A typical “Australian” film may be financed with government investment from Screen Australia, investment from producer(s), a loan from a specialised non-bank lender against a refundable tax offset , state-based grants and incentives, and finally, a ‘distribution advance’ or ‘minimum guarantee’ from the distributor(s) and/or sales agents.
1 2
Each Transaction Party brings different risk appetites, and social and commercial objectives, which are incorporated into their contracts in the form of conditions precedent, approval rights, delivery materials, as well as various covenants, undertakings, obligations, warranties, indemnities and termination rights When the contracts of all the Transaction Parties are considered together, in conjunction with the relevant legislation and common law, they form a complex web of obligations with which producers must comply, effectively creating a bespoke legal framework for each film.
Socio-cultural shifts affecting legal frameworks in the entertainment industry
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most significant shifts affecting the entertainment industry in recent times relate to technology:
Thanks to streaming, fewer people are going to cinemas and DVDs are becoming obsolete; Performers are concerned about the effects of artificial intelligence (“AI”) duplicating or editing their likeness or voice ;3
Writers and other creatives are concerned about their work being fed into generative AI (“GenAI”) programs and the unauthorised, un-trackable reproduction or derogation of their work that may occur as a result; and
The rapid evolution of technology in the current landscape means that distribution methods not previously contemplated may be the norm in the very near future
How are legal frameworks adapting?
As the legal frameworks for entertainment law are predominantly contract based and bespoke to each transaction, there is no cohesive, universal approach to socio-cultural and technological shifts However, there are some common threads in the contracts of different Transaction Parties:
Distributors
Audiences shifting to a preference for streaming has affected the shape, volume and financials of distribution deals. In particular:
Theatrical rights generate less revenue than in the past, so they may be considered less valuable, which affects what distributors are willing to pay as a distribution advance. Changes in technology have necessitated the creation and definition of new rights in films, for example (brace yourselves): SVOD, PVOD, AVOD, NVOD, TVOD, FTA, Non-Theatrical, Ancillary the list goes on!4
To account for shifts in technology, distributors may use language such as:
• “in all media now known or later devised”; or
• “throughout the universe”5
To ensure they don’t have to obtain additional rights in future if new forms of technology and film exploitation come into existence and are not covered by existing definitions
Geo-blocking technology is also a default requirement across most distribution contracts –although, virtual private networks (“VPNs”) are creating new challenges here.
Financiers
6
Financiers like Screen Australia manage their own response to socio-cultural shifts through internal policies, which are reflected in amendments to funding eligibility conditions, and the terms of investment contracts – for example:
Financiers may require that no AI or Gen AI is used in the creation and submission of funding applications; or
If successful in obtaining funding, producers may be required to register their projects with platforms that track metrics related to the production, for example, the population demographics of their cast and crew, or their carbon footprint.
Talent and Unions
Talent and unions can require specific protections in contracts for cast and crew, particularly limiting the use of a performer’s voice, likeness, image, or a creator’s work, into AI or GenAI programs. Collective bargaining agreements between producers’ industrial bodies and performer/crew/creative unions also evolve (albeit quite slowly) and require member producers to comply with terms that protect the cast, crew and creatives.7
Startups
In recent years, some technology-focused startups have evolved with the goal of solving problems in the industry, for example, startups that: enable transparent rights management for music (e g Australian startup Melodie );8 allow people to get paid for the use of their content in training GenAI models; or are doing traditional roles differently, for example, FilmChain , a collection agent , that uses a blockchain ledger to record film revenue and create transparent records. 9 10
11
Conclusion
Ultimately, the evolution of legal frameworks in the filmindustry occurs incrementally in accordance with the different policies, objectives and compliance obligations of the different Transaction Parties involved in a film. Broad changes are unusual unless the government introduces sweeping legislative amendments, or new collective bargaining agreements are reached As lawyers for producers, we help them to understand and comply with their obligations under legislation, then turn our focus to aligning the requirements of various Transaction Parties and minimising their effect on the producer’s ultimate goal: to make and show their film to the world.
LAW IN THE SPOTLIGHT, EXPLORING HOW LAW INTERSECTS WITH MEDIA, ARTS, AND CULTURE
BY KALARNI ORR GADENS 2025 GRADUATE
Legal frameworks have long played a foundational role in shaping the creative media landscape, not merely intersecting, but rather existing, in a continuous and dynamic dialogue - at times complementary, at times in tension, yet invariably shaping and informing one another. As media, arts and culture continue to evolve through digital platforms, global audiences and new technologies, the law is required to adapt in order to safeguard creative expression while responding to unprecedented social and technological change
Digital platforms have emerged as both enablers and disruptors of creative industries Social media platforms allow artists, writers, filmmakers, and creatives to engage with audiences without traditional gatekeepers. The emergence of influencer culture has prompted greater scrutiny around legal advertising standards, disclosure obligations and consumer protection laws. For example, online content creators promoting therapeutic goods is a prime example of where law and digital media collide in highly visible ways Defamation and privacy law have also assumed increasing prominence within this discourse. The speed at which information and misinformation travels online has heightened the risk of reputational harm. Assessing legal liability has become more complex in a landscape where traditional publishers coexist with anonymous users. This has led to renewed discussions about platform responsibility, freedom of expression, and fair dealings exceptions Broader intellectual property law - copyright, trade marks, designs, and patents provide a particularly clear illustration of the intersection between law and media, arts, and culture. One of the most pressing conversations in this space is the rise of generative artificial intelligence. AI tools prompt a re‐examination of foundational legal concepts such as authorship, independent intellectual effort, and originality It poses questions, if a machine generates a work based on vast datasets of existing art, who owns the result? And to what extent does inputting prompts amount to human authorship.
As media, entertainment and the creative arts continue to adapt and reflect society, legal frameworks must remain responsive, principled and innovative Set out below are three recent key areas of Australian law reform that illustrate how law intersects with media, arts and culture.
1. Investing in Australian Content
The Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill is an example of regulatory reform in response to digital media, resulting in a positive, landmark impact for Australian screen stories, creative industries and entertainment In force from 1 January 2026, the Bill introduced a mandatory Australian content expenditure requirement for major streaming platforms (think Netflix, Disney + , Prime Video). Streaming services with more than one million Australian subscribers are now required to invest at least 10% of their total program expenditure for Australia or 7 5% of Australian revenue, on Australian drama, children's, documentary, arts or educational programs.1
The passing of this Bill closes a longstanding gap with free-to-air broadcasters by introducing binding obligations for global streaming platforms to invest in Australian stories. As Minister for the Arts, Tony Burke stated “streaming services create extraordinary shows, and this legislation ensures Australian voices are now front and centre. Now, no matter which remote control you’re holding, Australian stories will be at your fingertips”. By requiring a minimum investment from these platforms into Australian genres, it aims to create steadier film development pipelines, stabilise commissioning cycles and secure employment longevity in the Australian film industry This may also shift Australian film production to facilitate local stories that are marketable internationally and expose Australian talent to international opportunities. The Bill aims to preserve Australian cultural presence in global distribution negotiations and streaming algorithms, serving as an example of how legal frameworks are adapting to shifts in entertainment. 2 3
2. Privacy vs Press
In June 2025, changes to the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) introduced a statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy. The new privacy tort aims to improve the distinction between genuine public-interest journalism and exploitative media content. The court is also required to balance public interest reporting with any privacy infringements The privacy tort more specifically aims to curtail privacy harms caused by the speed and aggression of digital media, which may infringe on privacy for online engagement, virality and monetisation purposes. As such, influencer commentary and online activism seeking to do so may be subject to recourse through the tort. Thus, it is hoped that the tort will preserve privacy boundaries and encourage restraint when publishing or republishing personal material.4
The privacy tort enhances the ability of plaintiffs to protect their privacy and to seek compensation, including for invasions to their physical privacy and misuse of information that relates to them. This new tort carves out a specific exemption to journalists, their employers, persons engaging them, and/or certain persons assisting them in their professional capacity where the invasion of privacy involves the collection, preparation for publication or publication of ‘journalistic material’ The new privacy tort is likely to have significant practical consequences on the way that media organisations and journalists conduct their day-to-day reporting.
3. No likes before sixteen
On 10 December 2025, Australia became the first country to enforce a minimum age requirement for social media accounts. This landmark reform introduces the Social Media Minimum Age obligation (SMMA) under Part 4A of the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (OSA), requiring platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent users under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts. Australia’s legislative change is significant because it’s the first of its kind to restrict access to social media platforms It’s not only the strict age limit, but also the introduction of substantial civil penalties on social media providers that fail to comply. The objective of the new Part 4A in the OSA is to reduce the risk of harm to age-restricted users from certain kinds of social media platforms. 5 6
In Conversation with: KATE HADDOCK KATE HADDOCK KATE HADDOCK
Partner at Banki Haddock Fiora | CHAIR OF Authors Legal | cHAIR OF Australian Copyright Council
Kate Haddock, partner at Banki Haddock Fiora, sits at the centre of a rapidly evolving legal landscape, where creativity, commerce and technology increasingly collide. Specialising in copyright and entertainment law, her work spans advising major industry players, engaging in policy discussions, and navigating the growing complexities introduced by artificial intelligence. Her career reflects both the opportunities and tensions within a field that is being reshaped in real time
Unlike many of her peers, Kate did not enter the legal profession with a clear sense of direction Without a legal background or connections in the field, her decision to study law was initially encouraged by a teacher who recognised her aptitude for debate. It was only during her time as a summer clerk that she encountered intellectual property law, an experience that proved transformative and ultimately defined her career path.
“I had no idea that intellectual property even existed… to find an area of law that dealt with these things that I loved was just quite revelatory to me,” she recalls, describing the moment she realised law could intersect with her lifelong interest in creative industries.
Having grown up in a family immersed in theatre, books and local media, the connection between law and creativity immediately resonated. Although she admits she did not initially enjoy studying intellectual property at university, her practical experience drew her back to the field. After several years working within a large firm, she later co-founded her own practice, motivated by a desire for closer client engagement and more meaningful legal work.
“REMEMBER “REMEMBER THAT IT’S THE THAT IT’S CLIENT YOU’RE YOU’RE THERE FOR, NOT FOR, YOURSELF.” YOURSELF.”
“We wanted to get away from the administrative side and focus on working directly with clients,” she explains, highlighting a deliberate shift toward a more hands on and relationship driven practice.
Her work today extends beyond private practice into governance and policy. As chair of organisations such as the Authors Legal service and the Australian Copyright Council, Kate contributes to broader discussions about copyright reform, access to legal services and the protection of creative rights
“It’s not a legal role as such, but I get exposure to a lot of policy discussions,” she says, noting that these positions provide insight into how law is shaped at a systemic level.
Looking ahead, Kate describes a field defined by both opportunity and uncertainty. The rapid rise of artificial intelligence has triggered global litigation, regulatory debates and new forms of commercial activity, particularly in licensing arrangements between creators and technology platforms. For lawyers, this creates intellectually engaging and often complex work
“From a lawyer’s perspective, it’s fascinating… there’s a lot of licensing transactions and new questions to think about,” she says, pointing to the evolving nature of agreements between rights holders and tech companies.
However, she draws a clear distinction between the legal perspective and that of creators. While lawyers may find these developments stimulating, artists are facing growing uncertainty about how to sustain their work in an increasingly automated and platform driven environment.
“From a creator’s perspective, it’s quite confronting,” she notes, reflecting broader concerns about income, ownership and replacement by AI generated content.
This shift is also reshaping the role of lawyers themselves. As AI tools become more capable of performing routine tasks such as drafting responses or reviewing contracts, traditional areas of legal work are being challenged. Kate recounts real world examples where individuals have used AI tools to respond to legal issues with reasonable success, particularly when they are unwilling or unable to pay for legal advice.
“You really have to demonstrate to the client the value of having human oversight on whatever the transaction is,” she explains, emphasising that lawyers must now articulate their expertise more clearly than ever.
At the same time, she is careful to highlight the limitations of these technologies. While AI can produce convincing outputs, it often lacks a true understanding of legal reasoning, which can lead to subtle but significant errors
“It’s not very good with emphasis… it doesn’t understand that a paragraph in a judgment isn’t the whole point,” she says, underscoring the risks of relying on automated tools without proper scrutiny.
Beyond technological disruption, structural challenges remain central to the field One of the most significant is the financial reality faced by many creators, particularly those in the early stages of their careers who may lack financial stability or bargaining power. This creates tension for lawyers who wish to support creative clients while maintaining a sustainable practice.
“If you want to serve creators as a lawyer, it can be difficult to make a living out of it,” she acknowledges, pointing to the economic pressures that shape both sides of the industry
Despite ongoing calls for reform, Kate takes a measured view on the adequacy of existing legal frameworks. Rather than seeing copyright law as outdated, she argues that it is already flexible enough to respond to emerging technologies, including AI, if applied correctly
“I think copyright law is actually well equipped to deal with AI,” she states, challenging the assumption that entirely new legal regimes are required.
Instead, she identifies the growing influence of large technology platforms as a more pressing concern In her view, regulation should focus on ensuring that these entities do not exploit creative works without fair compensation.
“Why should they be able to take something that others would ordinarily pay for?” she asks, questioning proposals for broad exceptions that would allow the use of copyrighted material without payment
At its core, Kate emphasises that copyright law plays a crucial economic role in sustaining creative industries. Without strong protections, both creators and the organisations that invest in their work may struggle to continue producing and distributing content.
“You can’t rely on artists, particularly those early in their careers with no financial protection, to continue creating without proper support,” she says, reinforcing the importance of maintaining robust legal safeguards.
Her day-to-day practice reflects the breadth and intensity of the field. A typical day may involve advising on licensing negotiations, managing litigation strategy, consulting with barristers and reviewing work produced by junior lawyers Alongside these responsibilities, administrative and compliance tasks remain an unavoidable part of practice, including adapting to new regulatory requirements such as anti-money laundering obligations.
“It’s a lot of emails, a lot of correspondence, a lot of phone calls,” she says “People use me as a sounding board,” she adds, highlighting the importance of maintaining strong and ongoing client relationships.
Much of her work also involves litigation, particularly in the Copyright Tribunal, where disputes often resemble Federal Court proceedings in structure and complexity.
“I think of myself temperamentally as a litigator,” she says, noting that while she may not manage every matter directly, she remains closely involved in overseeing strategy and outcomes. Client relationships, she emphasises, are central to everything.
“Without clients, you don’t have a practice,” she says simply, pointing to the fundamental role they play in shaping a lawyer’s work and success.
Even within a demanding schedule, there is room for the more human side of practice. Conversations with clients often extend beyond strictly legal matters, reflecting the close relationships built over time
“There’s a lot of ongoing conversation. Sometimes it’s about legal issues, sometimes it’s about what’s happening more broadly,” she says, noting that these interactions are part of what makes the work engaging.
For students and graduates hoping to enter the field, Kate’s advice is both practical and grounded. She encourages aspiring lawyers to cultivate a genuine interest in creativity, whether through music, art, literature or other forms, as this helps build a deeper appreciation for the work they are ultimately protecting.
“Read widely and be genuinely interested in creative industries,” she advises “It helps to understand what goes into making a creative work and why it has value.”
Equally important is maintaining a clear focus on the client. Understanding a client’s goals, whether commercial, creative or reputational, is essential to providing effective legal advice.
“Always put yourself in the client’s position and ask what they want out of the transaction,” she says. “The advice you give should be shaped by that.”
She also offers a realistic perspective on professional development Early legal work may feel repetitive or administrative, but it forms the foundation for more complex tasks over time
“You start with very basic work, but gradually you build up, and one day you realise you’ve improved without really noticing,” she reflects, describing the process as incremental but ultimately rewarding
Ultimately, Kate’s message is clear. The role of a lawyer is not to pursue abstract legal victories, but to serve the interests of the client in a practical and commercially meaningful way.
“Remember that it’s the client you’re there for, not yourself,” she says.
Intellectual property law and defamation law are two complex and continually evolving areas of the legal profession in Australia Philip Hayes, a senior lawyer in Johnstone and Reimer’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution team, has developed extensive experience in a broad range of litigation matters, including defamation and IP disputes and offers a practical perspective on their challenges and future direction. Having worked on matters across multiple levels of Victorian and Federal courts, including the High Court of Australia, Phillip’s career reflects both the breadth and dynamic nature of litigation practice. This progression has culminated in his recent appointment to a leadership role, where he now heads the firm’s Litigation Team at Johnstone and Reimer.
Senior Lawyer at Johnstone and Reimer Lawyers
Philip’s interest in intellectual property (IP) law can be traced back to his time as a law student at Deakin University. While he had “always had a bit of an interest” in the area, this was further developed through his studies, particularly under the guidance of an influential IP lecturer. His creative background also played a defining role. As a drummer, Philip was naturally drawn to a field of law that sits at the intersection of creativity and innovation He reflects that he was keen to incorporate this aspect of his identity “into [his] legal practice to the extent possible” making intellectual property law a natural and compelling fit.
When asked about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on intellectual property and defamation law, Philip suggests that both areas are poised for significant change, even if this is not yet fully reflected in court decisions. He explains that the nature of AI, drawing on vast amounts of existing material available online, inevitably raises questions around copyright, noting that there “definitely [will be] circumstances where AI will cobble something together that crosses into that copyright territory.”
The implications are equally significant in the context of defamation law. Philip highlights the tendency of AI to “hallucinate facts” presenting false information as if it were true. He cautions that publishing such material without verifying its accuracy may “expose yourself to a defamation claim,” particularly where there is recklessness as to the truth. Looking ahead, Philip anticipates that the intersection of AI with both intellectual property and defamation law will become increasingly prominent, making it an area to watch closely as future cases begin to emerge.
Alongside these emerging challenges, Philip also points to ongoing complexities within the existing legal frameworks In intellectual property law, particularly copyright, uncertainty remains a persistent issue. He observes that “part of the skill for lawyers is analysing, when you're talking to clients in the early stages, whether something is infringement or not,” highlighting the importance of careful judgment at the outset of a matter.
In defamation law, the serious harm threshold and its interpretation can be a further challenge Philip explains. He highlights the fact that it is not enough to establish that a defamatory publication has occurred; a plaintiff must also demonstrate that it has caused serious harm to their reputation. While case law provides some guidance, the concept remains far from clear-cut. “It’s not black and white, not 100% clearly defined,” he notes, adding that without serious harm, “it doesn’t matter how clear the defamation is, you don’t have a case.” He also points to the one-year period for bringing a defamation claim as being “quite a short limitation period”, which can complicate the assessment of potential cases. More broadly, Philip suggests that these challenges are shaped and “created by the current legal framework[s]” in that the scope of the serious harm threshold for defamation claims is grounded in legislation and precedent. However, he notes that this is by design, in order to avoid pointless claims, and believes this is good as claiming for defamation is “something I think that should be only used in serious situations.”
For Philip, the appeal of working in litigation lies in its variety. “When you're a litigator, every day is pretty different, which is why I do it, because there's no boring days in litigation”. While some intellectual property lawyers focus on transactional matters, such as registering trademarks, advising on copyright issues, or managing patent applications, his role is firmly centred on disputes. Philip comments that his days practising litigation are all about “staying on top of all of your files, making sure that you know all of your deadlines that are coming up, and making sure that you are going to be able to do what you need to do within those deadlines.”
Drawing on his own experience as a Deakin graduate, Philip encourages current Deakin law students with an interest in intellectual property or defamation law to make the most of the opportunities in those niche areas that come from Deakin’s “good connections with big commercial firms” He believes that future litigators are “probably better off building a more of a broad practice” to avoid locking themselves into one area of law at the very start of their careers. However, Philip also stresses that “there's certainly firms you can look into that will make you into a defamation expert”, if your heart is set on practicing in the very niche area that is defamation law Overall, Philip’s message to current law students dreaming of working in intellectual property or defamation law is to be willing to take on work in those areas when it comes, and highlights the importance of “having the support of the firm you're working in to take on that sort of work ”
Lawyer at Australian Football League
Chris Primmer, current Legal Counsel at the Australian Football League (AFL), offers practical insight into the field of sports law through the lens of both his commercial law background and his current in-house experience within a major sporting organisation. With six years of prior experience in commercial law, his career reflects a pathway shaped by adaptability, responsiveness to opportunity, and an evolving understanding of the intersection between law, sport, media, and governance.
Chris began by reflecting on his pathway into sports law, emphasising that it was not the result of a rigid or predefined plan, but rather a willingness to engage with opportunities as they emerged His approach to career development was grounded in making the most of each stage of his professional journey
“The only planning I did was always just make every opportunity count.”
He encourages law students and earlycareer professionals to adopt a similarly open and proactive mindset Rather than waiting for a clearly defined pathway into niche areas such as sports law, he stresses the importance of remaining engaged and responsive to new opportunities within the profession
Chris also acknowledges that sports law is not typically a discipline entered directly after graduation Instead, it is more commonly accessed after gaining experience in other areas of legal practice, particularly commercial law He highlights the importance of building transferable skills and developing a strong foundational understanding of legal practice before specialising. In his view, career progression in law is rarely linear.
“It’s not a nice linear path. Everyone’s going to have their own journey.”
A defining feature of sports law, according to Chris, is its dual nature as both a broad and highly specialised field. While it draws upon established areas of law such as commercial, employment, and intellectual property law, sports lawyers also operate within unique regulatory frameworks specific to their sporting organisations In the case of the AFL, this includes its role as both a governing and regulatory body, complete with internal tribunals, disciplinary systems, and sport-specific rules that shape legal decision-making
“I think the biggest areas that are unique to sports law… is the relevant rules and regulations that apply to the sport.”
Chris further highlights the growing importance of intellectual property and media considerations within the sporting industry. He explains that legal work in this space extends beyond the regulation of players and competition structures to include the protection and management of commercial assets, branding, and individual image rights.
“[It’s] not just about regulating the game and players, but also managing AFL's brand, the club’s intellectual property, and even the players’ own image.”
He also notes that sports law increasingly intersects with digital media platforms and broadcasting environments, where legal issues often arise in relation to reputation management, content distribution, and risk mitigation. These developments reflect the expanding scope of legal practice within sport, particularly as media ecosystems become more complex and commercially significant.
With technological advancement reshaping the broader entertainment and media landscape, Chris identifies emerging challenges and opportunities for sports law in the context of evolving fan engagement He reflects on how innovations in broadcasting and immersive technology may transform the way audiences experience sport in the future.
“Will fans one day be able to put on goggles and just watch a match? Could they put themselves in the umpire’s or a player’s shoes?”
He suggests that such developments will not only change how sport is consumed, but will also require legal frameworks to adapt in response to new commercial models, intellectual property considerations, and audience engagement structures.
“Media and IT are going to move really fast if it hasn’t already fan experience in game is going to be everchanging.”
However, Chris also identifies an ongoing tension between innovation and tradition within sport While technological and commercial developments present opportunities for growth and diversification, they must be balanced against the need to preserve the cultural and historical identity of sporting codes
“There’s a balance in so many sports between keeping tradition… and ensuring that we’re competing against all the other entertainment industries ”
He emphasises that this tension presents a broader strategic challenge for sports lawyers, who must consider not only the immediate legal and commercial implications of change, but also the longterm sustainability of the sporting ecosystem. In doing so, they must adopt a forward-looking approach that anticipates shifts in audience expectations, technological capability, and industry structure
“Sport lawyers need to match that mindset of being willing to change and do things differently. We all just got to make sure we’re evolving and not being stuck in the past.”
Despite the specialised nature of sports law, Chris underscores that prior experience in the field is not a prerequisite for entering the industry. Rather, he emphasises the importance of building strong legal capabilities in commercial practice and remaining open to opportunities as they arise
“You don't need sports experience, per se, to make a transition from a commercial firm into sport… just do the best job you can wherever you are in your career … and have your radar open for any opportunities that arise.”
He also highlights the importance of professional excellence at every stage of a legal career, noting that progression into specialised fields often depends on reputation, capability, and timing rather than direct entry pathways.
The path forward, he suggests, will require lawyers to play an increasingly important role in balancing innovation with tradition, commercial growth with integrity, and present demands with future possibilities In doing so, they will be central to ensuring that the legal frameworks underpinning sport continue to evolve in step with the game itself, preserving its traditions while enabling its future development
IN CONVERSATION WITH
LEGAL COUNSEL NETBALL WORLD
CUP SYDNEY 2027
As Australia prepares to host the Netball World Cup in Sydney next year, the focus is predominantly directed towards the athletes, national teams and fixtures. Behind the scenes, legal counsel Natasha Perry is helping to “build things from the ground up” from organising contracts to finalising deals, ensuring strong and viable frameworks for game day.
Natasha’s pathway into her role as Legal Counsel for the 2027 Netball World Cup emerged through a strong passion for netball from a young age, combined with a wealth of experience in both private practice and in-house legal roles at Clayton Utz. Growing up in Northwest Tasmania, she describes sport as “the lifeblood of the community”, where weekends revolved around local sport competitions. HoweverNatasha’s perspective shifted when she undertook a sports law elective during her law degree, prompting her to recognise that it could form the basis of a career. “I realised…this is something I can actually combine and do,” she says.
Although fans will see the elite athletes take to the court in August next year, preparations have been underway since 2023, beginning with the bidding process, followed by hosting agreements, venue negotiations and extensive operational coordination. As Natasha works in preparation for the tournament, she explains her role as one that is constantly evolving with different focus points and stages of the tournament to address on a day-to-day basis.
Her responsibilities span from drafting contracts for athlete participation and accommodation to organising sponsorship and hospitality deals. Natasha highlights that the tournament is created through several foundational “pillars”, including commercial, operations and support services such as legal, integrity and people and culture Across this framework, Natasha’s contributions remain largely behind the scenes.
“You’re a support service…you’re not going
to be the one getting
any glory,”
Conveying that her role is measured not by visibility, but rather by the absence of issues and the seamlessness of operations during the tournament.
As the sport industry progressively grows, netball stands out as one of Australia’s leading participation sports, with over one million participants nationwide. These advancements have also been facilitated within the legal landscape, with Natasha highlighting that legal and integrity counsels were once primarily external for sporting teams and tournaments.
However, in the current day and age, due to continual progressions and increasing complexities within sporting leagues, there has been a “shift in value in having inhouse legal counsel” These changes have created positive new structures within clubs and associations which have resulted in improvements from the drafting of contracts to the emergence of integrity teams spearheading wellbeing and safeguarding initiatives of professional athletes.
Within Netball Australia and the 2027 Netball World Cup, these legal developments have transformed netball into a more professional space, as the sport continues to develop athlete support frameworks and broaden its audience, sponsorships and international footprint.
Complementing this development within the legal industry, is the progress of technology and artificial intelligence, which act as useful tools in streamlining administrative tasks and summarising documents. From a legal perspective, Natasha believes that these tools can be incredibly beneficial in providing efficiency and productivity. However, she emphasises that the outputs from artificial intelligence do not equate to accurate legal expertise and must be assessed with critical judgment rather than being accepted at “face value”.
For law students who are curious about pursuing sports law, Natasha asserts that while it is often portrayed as a distinct discipline, it consists of a diverse range of legal fields like intellectual property, corporate, commercial and employment law, which are equally as crucial in forming a strong foundation. Given that contracts form a large component of her work, she also notes the importance of soft skills such as clear communication and strong comprehension as well as valuing the usage of simple English, to ensure legal advice is clear and accessible for stakeholders.
Reflecting on her career, Natasha identifies “making a difference in the everyday things” rather than headline achievements as one of the most rewarding aspects. Ultimately, whilst Natasha’s work as legal counsel for the Netball World Cup 2027 may not be directly visible on the netball court, it is profoundly fundamental in ensuring that when the whistle blows, every proposal, deal and framework has been overseen and coordinated seamlessly
Founder of Moira McKenzie legal
Technology is rapidly reshaping the entertainment industry, and for Moira McKenzie, the founder of Melbournebased music and entertainment law firm, Moira McKenzie Legal, this transformation is unfolding in real time. With a background as a musician and over a decade of legal experience, Moira offers a grounded and practical perspective on how law, creativity, and emerging technologies intersect
Moira’s pathway into law reflects a strong blend of musical passion and legal ambition. Beginning as a passionate musician, she completed a Bachelor of Contemporary Music before discovering entertainment law through a guest lecture Drawn to the idea of protecting artists and understanding the business side of music, she pursued a double degree in music and law.
While studying, she also gained hands-on experience working with an independent record label, which deepened her understanding of the industry. After moving to Melbourne, she secured a Practical Legal Training placement with a specialist entertainment law firm, where she remained for ten years before establishing her own practice in 2021.
Today, Moira’s work primarily involves reviewing, drafting, and negotiating for artists, managers, and industry professionals. She also handles disputes, often helping resolve conflicts before they escalate to litigation and copyright law. While her clients may appear “glamorous”, she notes that the legal work itself is meticulous and detail-oriented, involving constant communication, negotiation, and document drafting.
A major theme in Moira’s practice is the growing impact of artificial intelligence on copyright and the broader entertainment landscape. She observes that AI has already begun to disrupt traditional legal frameworks, particularly in relation to how creative works are used and protected.
“There’s a lot of discussion, lawsuits, politics, lobbying… the horse has kind of already bolted with AI,” she says
At the heart of the issue is copyright law, which Moira describes as needing further adaptation in response to rapidly evolving technology Concerns have emerged around the use of copyrighted material to train AI systems, often without permission from creators While proposals to amend the Copyright Act to allow such use have not yet been implemented, the uncertainty remains a significant concern for artists.
“There’s a very direct and tangible threat to creative work,” she explains, highlighting the risk of artists’ work being used without consent or compensation.
However, Moira also acknowledges potential opportunities She points to the possibility of licensing frameworks that would allow artists to opt in to having their work used for AI training in exchange for fair compensation. In her view, the challenge lies not in stopping AI, but in regulating it effectively.
“It’s more about putting in place a fair process… where artists have control and are properly compensated ”
Beyond AI, Moira identifies several ongoing challenges within the entertainment industry. The lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to impact live performance and touring, particularly for Australian artists facing geographical barriers to international markets. At the same time, digital platforms have both democratised music distribution and intensified competition, making it harder for artists to stand out.
Social media platforms like TikTok have created new opportunities, with some artists gaining global recognition overnight. Yet this increased accessibility also introduces more complex contractual relationships and legal considerations
From a legal perspective, Moira believes that current frameworks in Victoria and across Australia are not fully equipped to address these modern challenges While copyright law has been updated incrementally, it has yet to comprehensively address issues raised by AI and digital technologies.
“The law is always playing catch-up,” she notes, emphasising the need for reform to bring legislation in line with contemporary industry practices.
Technology has also transformed the way Moira practices law. Over the course of her career, she has witnessed a shift from paper-based systems to fully digital workflows Her practice is now entirely paperless, with communication conducted primarily through email, phone, and video calls This shift has increased efficiency and flexibility, allowing her to work with clients across Australia and internationally
Despite these advancements, she cautions against overreliance on AI tools in legal contexts While some clients attempt to use AI-generated advice or documents, she notes that such outputs are often inaccurate or impractical
“At the moment, I would not be trusting the advice… it might be mostly correct, but not commercial or practical ”
For aspiring lawyers interested in entertainment law, Moira emphasises the importance of practical experience. She encourages students to seek internships early, gain exposure to the industry, and learn directly from practitioners
“You are not going to learn how to be an entertainment lawyer at university… the only way is to do it in practice ”
The path forward, as reflected throughout Moira’s insights, lies in building a legal framework and professional culture that can adapt to rapid technological change while continuing to prioritise the protection of creative work.
It requires clearer regulation around emerging technologies such as AI, greater transparency in how creative material is used, and a continued focus on fair compensation and control for artists
For those entering the profession, it also means embracing practical experience early and developing a grounded understanding of how the industry operates. It is not just about responding to change, but about shaping a more balanced and sustainable future for entertainment law in the digital age.
In Conversation With Matilda McDonell
Retired Netball Player | National Integrity Lead at Gymnastics Australia
Balancing a career as an elite athlete and graduate lawyer is no walk in the park, yet for recently retired Giants netball player Matilda McDonell, the two have progressed in tandem
While many professional athletes choose to concentrate solely on their sporting careers, Matilda emphasises the importance of education, having established a career path that merges her passion for sport and her commitment to working in the legal industry, beyond the netball court.
Matilda’s pathway into law was not of a traditional nature with no familial ties to the profession, but rather progressed independently by her passion for sport and encouragement of those around her.
Whilst Matilda initially considered physiotherapy was the natural career progression as an athlete, she recalls “loving a bit of a back and forth argument” combined with her strength in English classes at school and critical analytical thinking skills, she began to see a degree in law as the natural fit
“Everyday is different”
From there, Matilda’s progression into sports law at Cricket NSW and Gymnastics Australia, developed from a sports law elective at University, where she recognised it was the “perfect intersection” between her sporting background and law degree.
Matilda’s involvement on the board of the Australia Netball Players’ Association (ANPA) also further enhanced her understanding of the governance and integrity frameworks that structure professional sports.
Following her retirement from professional netball in March this year, Matilda has shifted her focus to working as the National Integrity Lead at Gymnastics Australia
Adhering to the National Integrity Framework, Matilda explains that “every day is different”, where her day-to-day responsibilities extend from hosting interviews to complaint management to assisting with safeguarding procedures and governance processes to ensure the protection of athletes and stakeholders.
Matilda’s work as the National Integrity Lead within a sporting organisation demonstrates the broader parameters of sports law, where operational, commercial and ethical considerations interconnect.
As the sporting industry continue to develop, so does its governance frameworks. Matilda describes the current environment as an “exciting time” with sports organisations in Australia elevating their efforts and performance to enhance collective bargaining agreements and produce improved player contract negotiations.
While artificial intelligence is becoming an increasingly common tool in some work environments, Matilda states that on a day-to-day basis, such emerging technologies are used in minimal effort to ensure submissions and documentation is completed accurately and appropriately
For law students that are interested in pursuing a legal career in a sports-related role, Matilda recommends gaining exposure through organisations like the Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Association (ANZSLA), which organises networking events, information nights and webinars.
Ultimately, Matilda’s inspirational journey from netball courts to contracts as the National Integrity Lead at Gymnastics Australia not only reflects her own tenacity, but also demonstrates the limitless possibilities for young women across a diverse range of professions.
While IP law is crucial for addressing infringements, it was not designed for instantaneous replication on global platforms, meaning enforcement continues to lag the pace of fashion itself.
Shift 2: The Rise of Dupe Culture
The rise of “dupe culture” has become a defining feature of contemporary fashion markets. Dupes are products designed to closely resemble high-profile items without being exact copies While they do not always infringe intellectual property rights, they can erode brand value, confuse consumers, and divert market share from original creators
Australian IP law attempts to balance competition and consumer choice with protection against illegitimate free riding. Fashion design, particularly once massproduced, can be difficult to safeguard, which is why imitation of style, or dupe culture, is often tolerated. However, the stakes remain high for designers: brand value and consumer perception can be significantly impacted even in the absence of clear legal infringement.
Trade mark law plays a critical role where dupes create confusion about origin or authenticity while registered design rights may provide protection where similarity is substantial. Australian Consumer Law may apply where conduct is misleading or deceptive The pressures of dupe economies have increased the urgency for designers to act early, registering designs, securing trade marks, or protecting other intangible assets before imitation spreads. Once a design has been widely copied, opportunities for legal protection may be lost entirely
As technology and manufacturing speed increase, there is growing discussion around expanding the use of non-traditional trade marks, such as shapes and distinctive design features, to better defend against the realities of dupe culture. Protecting brand value has become as essential as protecting the design itself, reinforcing the role of IP law in a rapidly evolving fashion landscape.
Shift 3: Branding as Cultural Capital within a Specific Place and Time
Branding functions as both a commercial asset and a form of cultural identity. In a crowded digital marketplace, visual identity, including colour, logos, shapes, typography, and other aesthetic signals, have become as valuable, and sometimes more valuable, than the product itself. A brand’s recognisable elements convey meaning, status, and trust, transforming design and style into cultural capital.
Consider Tiffany & Co. The company does not own “blue” in general; it claims a specific Pantone shade (1837), used in highly controlled ways, particularly in its packaging This precision is essential: trade mark protection attaches not to a colour in the abstract, but to a carefully defined commercial use. Branding does not always rely on absolute consistency, but the controlled and recognisable use of key elements, whether colour, logo design, or distinctive packaging, is what maintains brand value and prevents consumer confusion.
Geography and regulation can also shape branding. In Sedona, local planning laws required McDonalds to replace its iconic golden arches with a turquoise version to better align with the surrounding red rock landscape This change was not about brand reinvention but legal and geographic constraint. It highlights how branding, through colour, shape and other visual identifiers, is influenced not only by trade mark law but also by cultural context, place, and regulation.
Final Thoughts
While intellectual property law remains the primary mechanism for protecting fashion creativity, its evolution demonstrates an increasing willingness to adapt to the realities of a globalised and digitally driven industry. For many designers, entering the fashion industry can feel like a race to the ocean, where those who establish a distinct identity early are able to survive Monitoring, enforcement, and contractual clarity have become as important as registration itself. By offering stronger protection for branding than for design, the law encourages designers to invest not only in what they create, but in how that creation is recognised.
References
Celene Ignacio, ‘Dupes, IP, and the law: How Australia’s copycat economy is shaping retail’, Retailbiz (Web Page, 19 August 2025) <https://www.retailbiz.com.au/topics/marketing/dupes-ip-and-the-law-howaustralias-copycat-economy-is-shaping-retail/>
Emily Brooks, ‘Why Brand Colors May Not Translate Globally for International Trademark’, Protect TM (Web Page, 26 September 2025) <https://protect.tm/en/blog/why-brand-colors-may-not-translate-globally-forinternational-trademark>
Elise Steegstra and Belinda Sigismundi, ‘Intellectual Property protection for fashion brands in Australia’, Macpherson Kelley (Web Page, 26 February 2025) <https://mk.com.au/intellectual-property-protection-for-fashion-brands-inaustralia/>
Henry EA, ‘Fake it ‘til you make it: The dubious rise of dupes’, LSJ Online (Web Page, 24 January 2025) <https://lsj com au/articles/fake-it-til-you-make-it-the-dubiousrise-of-dupes/>.
IP Australia, ‘Intellectual Property Law for the Fashion & Textile Industry’ Australian Government IP Australia (PDF Guide, 2021) <https://ausfashioncouncil.com/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/IP-Australia-Guide.pdf>.
James Avison, ‘McDonald’s Green European Revolution’ Into the Consumerverse Exploring the Universe of Consumer Psychology(Web Page, 11 October 2019) <https://theconsumerverse.wordpress.com/2019/10/11/mcdonalds-green-europeanrevolution/>.
Laura Pitcher, ‘Tiffany & Co Want to Save the Tiffany Blue Ocean’, Dazed (Web Page, 31 March 2025) <https://www.dazeddigital.com/fashion/article/66496/1/tiffany-cowant-to-save-the-tiffany-blue-ocean>.
Rebecca Crowe, ‘How This Town’s Unusual Ban Created The World’s Only Blue McDonald’s Sign’, The Travel (Web Page, 20 June 2025) <https://www.thetravel.com/towns-unusual-ban-created-the-worlds-only-bluemcdonalds-sign/>.
Sophia Chetcuti, ‘Can You Register a Colour as a Trade Mark? Here’s What You Need to Know’, Shand Taylor Lawyers (Web Page, 06 May 2025) <https://www.shandtaylor.com.au/post/can-you-register-a-colour-trade-markhere-s-what-you-need-to-know>.
Everyone seems to be talking about space right now.
One does not have to look far beyond a clear night sky to appreciate why. The cosmos has compelled artists for centuries, from Van Gogh’s The Starry Night to the extensive archive of NASA photographs held in the National Gallery of Victoria’s collection. The aesthetic appeal of space is deeply entwined with its scientific intrigue Both stem from a shared experience: when we look upward, we confront the limits of human understanding.
The recent Artemis II mission, which sent four astronauts on a ten-day circumlunar voyage, drew global attention to the meticulous engineering and collective resolve of a crew assembled amid an era of profound societal division, a poignant reminder that we, too, are all crew on the fragile spacecraft that is Earth. Yet, as in the aftermath of the Apollo missions, it was the imagery that endured.
Who Owns Art Made in Space?
By Jessica O’Connor, Monash Law Graduate and Legal Intern at ACMI
For me, the most resonant was ‘Earthset’, captured by Commander Reid Wiseman through the Orion spacecraft’s window: a partially illuminated crescent Earth descending behind the cratered lunar horizon, clouds adrift over Australia and Oceania on the planet’s sunlit face, the remainder receded into darkness. This image encapsulates both scientific achievement and artistic expression, rendering the distinction between the two almost irrelevant.
The intersection between art and science is something popular culture has long acknowledged. Star Wars, 2001: A Space Odyssey and Interstellar each articulate an enduring curiosity with the prospect of life beyond Earth More recently, Project Hail Mary has provided another example, notable not only for its science, or even for how beautiful Ryan Gosling looks when he cries, but for its nuanced exploration of creativity in extremis
Rocky’s artistic expressions, produced in conditions that would seem to preclude creative endeavour, suggest that creativity is not merely incidental to survival but constitutive of it, especially in environments that resist it. Beyond being one of the film’s most compelling fictional ideas, it also raises significant legal questions.
This is not an entirely new observation. In 1965, cosmonaut Alexei Leonov embarked on the Soviet Voskhod 2 mission equipped with coloured pencils specifically adapted for zero gravity, each tethered by a thread and secured with a rubber band. Following his historic spacewalk, Leonov returned to the capsule and created what is regarded as the first artwork produced in space: an abstract sketch of an orbital sunrise observed as Earth curved beneath him.
Today, this drawing resides in the Museum of the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre and continues to prompt an unresolved legal question: when art is created beyond Earth, what legal framework governs it?
The foundational legal framework regulating activity in space is the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. This treaty establishes that outer space is the ‘province of all humankind’ and prohibits any single State from claiming sovereignty over celestial territory. However, the Treaty does not address intellectual property rights. Instead, Article VIII specifies that objects sent into space remain under the jurisdiction of the launching state, regardless of their presence in orbit This applies Earth-based legal principles to items in orbit but still leaves questions about ownership of artistic creations made in orbit unresolved
The 1998 Intergovernmental Agreement on Space Station Cooperation sought to operationalise these principles For intellectual property purposes, activities conducted aboard the International Space Station are legally situated within the territory of the partner state that registered the relevant module Thus, a US astronaut working on a US module is subject to US law, while a Japanese astronaut working on a Japanese module is subject to Japanese law.
This jurisdictional framework functions adequately for patents and scientific inventions but proves less satisfactory when applied to artistic works The Agreement is fundamentally oriented toward industrial innovation, not the complexities of authorship in environments with no terrestrial equivalent, nor the question of where a work is ‘made’ when neither the creator nor medium is confined to a single jurisdiction.
In principle, copyright protection extends beyond Earth’s atmosphere. For example, under Australian law, copyright subsists automatically in original works and generally vests in the author, subject to employment or contractual arrangements
However, while international instruments such as the Berne Convention facilitate cross-border recognition, copyright protection’s operation remains territorial, hinging on where a work is considered to have been created, a question that becomes far more ambiguous in orbit
Possible points of connection may include the law of the registering state of the spacecraft, the artist’s nationality or place of residence, or the place of first publication. Each offers a plausible solution, yet none provide a comprehensive account of authorship in a non-territorial environment.
The resulting reliance of states on quasi-territorial approaches underscores the importance of human rights principles in ensuring that outer space remains a domain for the collective benefit of humanity, rather than a resource monopolised by select powers or corporations. Absent a coherent and comprehensive legal framework, ownership is likely to default to those with the means to access space in the first place.
Another complication is cultural heritage. On Earth, some works are recognised as having value beyond private ownership. In space, no such regime exists. In 1971, Apollo 15 Commander David Scott placed a small aluminium sculpture, the Fallen Astronaut, on the lunar surface, thereby transforming the Moon into an inadvertent exhibition space The sculpture, created by Paul Van Hoeydonck to honour fourteen astronauts and cosmonauts who died in the pursuit of space exploration, remains on the Moon to this day
When Van Hoeydonck later sought to sell replicas of the work, NASA intervened, citing restrictions on commercial exploitation of the space programme The underlying legal questions persist. What legal instrument could clarify ownership of a work such as Fallen Astronaut, establish responsibility for its preservation, or decide if future missions may remove or replicate it? Current legislation offers no definitive answers.
The rise of commercial space activity further complicates these uncertainties. While NASA images are in the public domain under US law unless otherwise restricted, this policy does not extend to private entities such as SpaceX, whose activities are governed as much by contractual arrangements as by statutory law.
As commercial spaceflight proliferates, the question of ownership is increasingly shaped by private agreements rather than public regulation
In this context, copyright does not simply extend into space; it stretches across multiple jurisdictions, returning to terrestrial courts operating within legal systems never intended for orbital activity.
As more artists continue to engage with the cosmos, contributing to questions of existence, ownership, identity, and the ethics of exploration, legal frameworks must adapt. Human creativity has well and truly crossed Earth’s boundaries; the real challenge is whether our laws can do the same.
