‘D-Day’ for Copyright case
The landmark copyright case between iiNet and a group of film and television studios looks set to have its next chapter.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
The landmark copyright case between iiNet and a group of film and television studios looks set to have its next chapter next Wednesday.
A case has been set down for 9:30 am, Court Room 18C. Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales Registry, February 4, 2010.
The Internet Service Provider was taken to court by a number of Hollywood Studios, and Channel Seven, over failing to stop subscribers from illegally downloading copyrighted movies and television. The case began in October and was adjourned in November.
Film industry lawyers said its investigators demonstrated 97,942 instances of unauthorised copies being made available by the ISP’s customers over a 59-week period.
The thrust of iiNet’s argument was that it couldn’t police the habits of its users, only refer them to authorities.
Lawyers for the film industry claimed iiNet had done “nothing” to discourage copyright infringement on its network.
The case is expected to be taken to the High Court of Australia, regardless of who wins.
Source: ComputerWorld
13 Responses
Scott, take heart in the fact that the proposed system whereby individual URLs are blacklisted, is going to be an utter disaster in almost every aspect. One URL from a high traffic site and the censorship boxes die. There’s an abundant supply of other aspects the government is setting themselves up for complete failure and embarrassment, although a TV blog isn’t the place to discuss them in-depth.
@No_Netcensor
I wish it were that easy as to vote but I fear they will be rushing through this legislation before the polls, I think it is going to be tabled in march sometime, by the time the election rolls around in November even if we do vote Liberal they will not repeal it unless they make it an election promise…. and even then i wouldn’t guarantee it. As David Webb said they want a corporate run internet which monitors its users. The only way to stop the government is to write to them and protest, I believe there will be protests in every capital city soon…
Last time i checked most iinet data runs through Telstra phone lines.What have they done to stop it?
Look I support the industry, and purchase a lot of DVDs, but this is a really dumb lawsuit. iiNet provides a straightforward service – Internet access to their customers. Just like Telstra is obliged to facilitate phone communications that customers are making, iiNet and other ISPs are obliged to facilitate the transmission of Internet data. They are not compelled to intercept any of that data. In fact, it is illegal for them to do so under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act.
What this lawsuit will do, in the likely case that it will fail, is cause AFACT considerable bad publicity and do them more harm than good.
Maybe the studios should go after the networks that contently delay international shows for months or years, leading to people breaking the law in the first place to watch the shows they love!
Can Telstra be held accountable if someone uses the phone to rip people off with marketing scams?
The problem is that Conroy has expressed his interest in this case, to the effect that the Govt. may legislate, depending on its outcome.
A bit like him already pre-deciding that iinet should lose, but if they don’t then he’ll change the law to make it clear they’re required to police copyright infringements.
And if Labor gets its mandatory ISP filter in place, guess what it could potentially be used to monitor, or to try to block? Please consider these issues when you go to the polls later this year.
Tim, they chose iinet because they are smaller than optus and Bigpond.
From the afact point of view, I can’t beleive they took this action against one of the biggest ISPs in the country. They should of gone after a tiny operator who couldn’t afford the legal fees – thus sending the ISP broke and winning almost by default. This would of given them the precedent to go after the bigger outfits.
Aside from the morality of it, and the ridicolous idea it is a companies job to be judge and jury. I don’t get afacts tactics at all. Hmmm
They want nothing more than a corporate run Internet which tracks and monitors the habits and usage of every user.
The old business models are done. Adapt or die, it’s that simple.
This is one joke of a case. I hope they don’t win against iinet, it’s an awesome company who obviously understands that corporations should never become the police.
Mad how iinet have been singled out. I’d find it hard to believe customers of other providers don’t do exactly the same thing. How do they differ in their obligations and resposibilities? Or is it a case of beating up one scapegoat to make an example of them?
Wonder when the various car manufacturer’s are going to be taken to court for producing vehicles that can exceed the speed limit and increase the chances of injury or death!
It’s up to individuals as to how the internet is used, shouldn’t be for any ISP to police.