[LINK] The Electronic Transactions (Victoria) Act 2000
Fri, 30 Jun 2000 15:58:25 +1000
stewart carter wrote:
> Paul Montgomery wrote:
> >Lest the Victorians try to take credit for this, it must be said that this
> >Act is a mirror of the Commonwealth Electronic Transactions Act. NSW has
> >also passed mirror legislation, and other states are following. The
> >previous Victorian Kennett government actually tried to push through its
> >own laws, which would have been a disaster for interstate business
> >contracts, but thankfully Bracks' boys have decided to knuckle under. The
> >passing of the mirror Acts is actually a big win for Daryl Williams, the
> >Federal A-G.
> >Those among you who are interested (wasn't Link originally supposed to be
> >for librarians?!?) can read the article I have written for the upcoming
> >May/June issue of Image & Data Manager magazine on this topic, and visit
> >the A-G's site for updates on each state's progress:
> Paul, this is all wrong. And instead of slagging off at Victorians and
> praising Darryl Williams you ought to be thanking us and criticising the A-G.
First, let me say that I am a Victorian myself, so no disrespect is
intended towards Victorians in general, or those who hold Stewart's
views in particular.
> The historical facts are that Victoria's repeated threat to go it alone
> with its pioneering digital signature legislation under the Kennett
> government eventually forced the federal government's hand. ( As it was
> always intended to do)
> It is Victoria that deserves any credit there is to be had for pushing
> Australia into the Electronic Transactions Law.
The historical facts are that the Feds had participated in a process
sponsored by an United Nations agency called UNCITRAL to develop a
"Model Law" which was to be passed across not only states, but
countries, making sure that the legal framework for electronic
transactions was consistent across multiple international jurisdictions.
After the UNCITRAL Model Law was formalised, but before the Feds had had
a chance to implement it, Alan Stockdale came in with a
unilaterally-developed law which would have meant chaos for business in
using digital certificates and other electronic authentication
techniques across state borders. It would have been like having an ABN
just for Victoria and another one of the rest of Australia - worse than
that, in fact - and hardly a good outcome for e-commerce.
> And far from 'Bracks boys' having decided to 'knuckle under', the
> Victorian legislation is not, in fact, a mirror image of the federal Act.
> As I wrote in the Age and in my eCommerce Report at the time ( 1 May ),
> eminent legal experts in this area said that the Victorian Act is close to
> the federal act, but different in a number of important respects.
> The definition of consent is different, effective dates are different,
> exemptions are different and, most importantly, the state law covers the
> private sector whereas the federal law only relates to Commonwealth
> government agencies
All but the last are much less important than the clauses which conform
to the national approach to infrastructure like the NEAC, which the
previous Victorian bill did not support in favour of a state-only body
called the ESRB. On the last point, the explanation is very simple:
contract law comes under state jurisdiction.
> Moreover with only two states thus far enacting companion legislation to
> the federal act, Williams preferred federalist approach to getting national
> laws in this area is looking increasingly flawed as every day passes.
This process has taken more than three years Stewart, so (with all due
respect) give it a bit more time before you predict its demise.
Paul Montgomery, CEO @ AusBONE, the ISP peering co-operative.
Land: not yet Mobile: 0410 622 589 mailto:email@example.com