Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

iiNet slays Hollywood in landmark piracy case

ASHER MOSES

February 4, 2010 - 10:06AM

The giants of the film industry have lost their case against ISP iiNet in a landmark judgement handed down in the Federal Court today.

The decision had the potential to profoundly impact internet users and the internet industry as it sets a legal precedent surrounding how much ISPs are required to do to prevent customers from downloading movies and other content illegally.

But after an on-and-off eight week trial that examined whether iiNet authorised customers to download pirated movies, Justice Dennis Cowdroy found that the ISP was not liable for the downloading habits of its customers.

In a summary of his 200-page judgment read out in court this morning, Justice Cowdroy said the evidence established that iiNet had done no more than to provide an internet service to its users. He found that while iiNet had knowledge of infringements occurring and did not act to stop them, such findings did not necessitate a finding of authorisation.

He said an ISP such as iiNet provides a legitimate communication facility which is neither intended nor designed to infringe copyright. He said it was only by means of the application of the BitTorrent system that copyright infringements were enabled, but iiNet had no control over this system.

"iiNet is not responsible if an iiNet user uses that system to bring about copyright infringement ... the law recognises no positive obligation on any person to protect the copyright of another," Justice Cowdroy said.

Justice Cowdroy remarked that the case had attracted widespread interest both in Australia and abroad. It was the first Australian trial to be covered on Twitter and the first trial of its kind in the world to proceed to hearing and judgment.

The suit against iiNet was filed in November 2008 by a group of the biggest Hollywood studio including Village Roadshow, Universal Pictures, Warner Bros, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, 20th Century Fox and Disney, as well as the Seven Network.

They claimed iiNet was liable for ‘‘authorising’’ copyright infringement on its network because it did not warn or disconnect offending customers when repeatedly notified of the infringements by the movie studios.

The studios had hired an online investigator firm to intercept BitTorrent traffic over 59 weeks and record instances of iiNet users downloading pirated movies.

iiNet argued that it was not required by law to act on ‘‘mere allegations’’ of copyright infringement, that customers were innocent until proven guilty in court, and that the case was like suing the electricity company for things people do with their electricity.

But during the trial iiNet’s managing director Michael Malone conceded that the notices provided by the movie studios presented “compelling evidence” of copyright infringement by iiNet customers.

However, iiNet’s legal counsel, Richard Cobden, said privacy provisions in the Telecommunications Act prevented it from forwarding the studios’ infringement notices to customers.

He said iiNet was also protected under Safe Harbour provisions of the Copyright Act, which limit an ISP’s liability if it takes ‘‘reasonable steps’’ to deal with repeat copyright infringers.

The barrister for the studios, Tony Bannon, said that iiNet failed to take any ‘‘reasonable steps’’ to combat copyright infringement.

He said iiNet’s practice of forwarding infringement notices to police and stating in its terms and conditions that illegal downloading was not permitted – while not enforcing this rule - did not constitute reasonable steps.

The studios also presented email evidence which showed that, despite iiNet’s claims that it could not act on the notices, Westnet, which was acquired by iiNet in May 2008, was in fact passing them on to customers until Malone told a Westnet senior staff member to drop the policy.

Other ISPs, including TPG, have also been passing copyright infringement notices on to customers.

Cobden said the studios were trying to place an ‘‘unreasonable burden’’ on ISPs, and that ‘‘we will not take on the rights holders’ outsourcing of their rights enforcement’’.

Justice Cowdory agreed. and said, while iiNet was entitled to protection under the Safe Harbour provisions, there was no need for iiNet to take advantage of this as he did not find it authorised its users' copyright infringement.

He found that a scheme for notification, suspension and termination of customer account was not in this instance a relevant power to prevent copyright infringement.

This should send a clear message to those hollywood copyright **** that there are parts of the world where they can't just sue who ever they want & always get their way!

Good to see the Judge had some common sense in him unlike stupid ass Conroy with his Nazi internet filter.

This particular battle might have being won, but the long copyright war has just began...

A interesting article I found: LINK

This week the Federal court has thrown out AFACT's case against iiNet, leaving its lawyers all dressed up with no-one to sue. While you can be sure there will be appeals, the copyright police will obviously be looking for a new target. You.
Edited by Mayuri Krab

the other thing was that when they tried that in the US (suing innocent people) there was a huge backlash strangely enough because shock horror it turned out that young kids and grannies were amongst those that were getting sued!

The thing to watch out for is Stephen Conjob Conroy setting up more privacy invading legislation to make it easier for AFACT etc to shaft the endusers.

yes it was a good result. makes me proud to be a iinet customer. and it's not about allowing people to download pirated videos. it's about protecting peoples freedoms and privacy and not turning your ISP into another internet policeman.

We've been discussing this at the office all week.

Being an internet provider, we we're watching it very closely. We get the notifications about illegal downloads now and then, but by law, we don't have to do anything about it. iiNet were doing exactly as we were, following the law. You don't see Holden getting sued everytime one of their cars crash. You don't see the water board getting sued everytime someone drowns in a pool.

Long story short, we provide an internet connecting service, not a child minding service.

We've been discussing this at the office all week.

Being an internet provider, we we're watching it very closely. We get the notifications about illegal downloads now and then, but by law, we don't have to do anything about it. iiNet were doing exactly as we were, following the law. You don't see Holden getting sued everytime one of their cars crash. You don't see the water board getting sued everytime someone drowns in a pool.

Long story short, we provide an internet connecting service, not a child minding service.

a better analogy would be to sue holden for people speeding in its cars

Conroy is an idiot, internet filtering was never and will never be a plausible solution.

its up to parents to tell their kids what not look at / teach them morals.. but after all.. you're a kid so one way or another you're going to see or do what your parents DON'T want you to see.. unless you're a brainwashed slave (yay for religious extremists)

and a big thumbs up to the decision. yay for iinet standing up.! :thumbsup:

the movie industry pretty much makes me boycott buying DVD's now because of all the stupid shit they're doing.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • The car/ECU will have all the sensor that it needs and expect to have. I think i do not have to explain to you how the Link is way better specialy if you have swapped engine   I just do not want to deal with any "problems" cuz i have only Nistune which i learned is not that great and in my case cant even deal with that speed problem (Link can) And of course it will be way more easier to tune and diagnose and safe. And for the ECU/speed problem...i dont know.
    • Per Mark Roberts of Sonictune: Mark Robert Author At this time, no. No ETA either 2016-17 models. You will be able to purchase and install a 2018.5+ TCU though   TCU purchasing and pricing info! As we near the release of TCU tuning, I am going to answer some questions I get asked often.   What do I need for TCU tuning? At this time, you will need a 2018.5+ TCU to be able to tune. If you have a 2016-to early 2018, you will need to replace your TCU with the newer version. One good way to know if your TCU is good is if you have auto upshift in manual mode in 1st gear around 6500 rpms. If your manual 1st gear goes to 7k rpm and will hit the rev limiter unless you shift, you have the older TCU.   Why do I need to buy another ecu license/phone flash if I already have it on my ECU tune? The TCU is its own computer module. It is completely separate from the ECU. Because of this, you will be required to purchase a TCU license and, if your tuner has it, the phone flash license required to tune it via phone/bluetooth.   Do I need TCU tuning? TCU tuning is NOT required. However, the faster your setup, the more it will assist in track and dragy time consistency.   If I’m ECU tuned by (tuner A) can I get my TCU tuned by (Tuner ? Yes, since it’s a different module and a completely separate flash, you can have two different tuners. However, it is highly recommend that you have both tuned by the same tuner. For me, my TCU tuning will directly complement my ECU tuning style and features and running my ECU and another TCU or vice versa MIGHT cause some issues. At this time and for the foreseeable future, I will only be tuning my current ECU tuned customers TCUs.     I have a SYVECS AWD controller. Do I still need it? Yes! The AWD controllers main job is to control your AWD system. However, with TCU tuning, you will no longer need the auto-shift function as that will be done through the TCU. The AWD controller will still be very beneficial for racers looking to maximize traction on the launch.     Shift schedule changes: holding gears longer at lower pedal input as well as max shift rpm changes. Please note, the new ECU race rom coming out will address 90% of the shitty drivability issues these cars have through custom maps from myself and Racebox—as well as others I am sure.   Increase shift speeds: as seen in the videos I’ve been posting, the TCU shifts much faster once tuned.   Increased shift pressures: as also seen in the videos, much firmer full throttle shifts.      
    • Per Mark Roberts of Sonictune:     Mark Robert Author At this time, no. No ETA either 2016-17 models. You will be able to purchase and install a 2018.5+ TCU though   TCU purchasing and pricing info! As we near the release of TCU tuning, I am going to answer some questions I get asked often.   What do I need for TCU tuning? At this time, you will need a 2018.5+ TCU to be able to tune. If you have a 2016-to early 2018, you will need to replace your TCU with the newer version. One good way to know if your TCU is good is if you have auto upshift in manual mode in 1st gear around 6500 rpms. If your manual 1st gear goes to 7k rpm and will hit the rev limiter unless you shift, you have the older TCU.   Why do I need to buy another ecu license/phone flash if I already have it on my ECU tune? The TCU is its own computer module. It is completely separate from the ECU. Because of this, you will be required to purchase a TCU license and, if your tuner has it, the phone flash license required to tune it via phone/bluetooth.   Do I need TCU tuning? TCU tuning is NOT required. However, the faster your setup, the more it will assist in track and dragy time consistency.   If I’m ECU tuned by (tuner A) can I get my TCU tuned by (Tuner ? Yes, since it’s a different module and a completely separate flash, you can have two different tuners. However, it is highly recommend that you have both tuned by the same tuner. For me, my TCU tuning will directly complement my ECU tuning style and features and running my ECU and another TCU or vice versa MIGHT cause some issues. At this time and for the foreseeable future, I will only be tuning my current ECU tuned customers TCUs.     I have a SYVECS AWD controller. Do I still need it? Yes! The AWD controllers main job is to control your AWD system. However, with TCU tuning, you will no longer need the auto-shift function as that will be done through the TCU. The AWD controller will still be very beneficial for racers looking to maximize traction on the launch.     Shift schedule changes: holding gears longer at lower pedal input as well as max shift rpm changes. Please note, the new ECU race rom coming out will address 90% of the shitty drivability issues these cars have through custom maps from myself and Racebox—as well as others I am sure.   Increase shift speeds: as seen in the videos I’ve been posting, the TCU shifts much faster once tuned.   Increased shift pressures: as also seen in the videos, much firmer full throttle shifts.      
    • The fancy pants red shock tower brace is finally incoming from MX5 Mania, getting it shipped from 'Merica has been a long and problematic process, and GWR, the 'Merican supplier will not ship directly to consumers outside of the US, Mania basically had to order a heap of them, the colour choice was silver, or red, and we all know anything red adds 5 killerwasps of dynotorques..... Whilst it does fit over a 2.5, and I've seen a few photos and videos of it being installed and fitting, google also says it might get real close to the FAB9 intake front runner, people in the US says it does fit with the FAB9 intake, except for one person who said it slightly touched.......so there is that.....LOL..... As it seems that I am the first in AU to have this combination of parts there's no local knowledge about fitment, so I'm just a willing guinea pig in this endeavour, I'll cross my fingers and toes and hope for the best In other news, I ordered stuff from China  on the same day I ordered the 23° silicone bend from Victoria, the stuff from China arrived a day ago, the 23° silicone bend is still travelling around Australia thanks to Australia Post, and "may" be here next week
    • Very good news...I contacted Racebox about it last night. My car is a 2016 so remains to be seen if it is compatible, requires a TCU swap, or is impossible.
×
×
  • Create New...