[Chapter-delegates] Australian court rules in favour of Internetservice provider

[Christine Runnegar]

Thank you Narelle for your excellent summary and analysis of the iiNet case.


No small feat, particularly given the many complex issues covered in the
200+ page judgment! 

Great media release too. Compliments to ISOC-AU.

This case and your analysis will also be of great interest to the ISOC
Working Group on emerging policy responses to 'online piracy'. 

There are lot of things happening around the world in the Internet policy
space every day. Reports like this really help us stay on top of what is
happening in the local and regional space. Thanks!

Best regards,
Christine

P.S. Any word as to whether Roadshow Films Pty Ltd or any of the other
applicants will be filing an appeal?

______________________

Christine Runnegar
Public Policy Manager
Internet Society
Galerie Jean-Malbuisson 15
CH-1204 Geneva
Switzerland

Tel: +41 22 807 1455
www.isoc.org 

-----Original Message-----
From: chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
[mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Narelle
Sent: 4 February 2010 4:49 AM
To: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
Subject: [Chapter-delegates] Australian court rules in favour of
Internetservice provider

All
In Nov 2008 a group film industry players lodged a claim against an
Australian ISP arguing it had infringed copyright by not cutting off users
downloading copyright material. The Australian Federal Court today ruled
against the film industry, saying:
iiNet did not authorise copyright infringement because 1. infringements
occurred directly as a result of the BitTorrent system, not the use of the
Internet and this ISP does not control the BitTorrent system, 2. this ISP
did not have the power to prevent those infringements occurring, and 3. this
ISP did not sanction, approve or countenance copyright infringement

The film industry had commissioned a third party to investigate copyright
infringement from use of the BitTorrent protocol by iiNet's subscribers.

"AFACT employed a company known as DtecNet to investigate copyright
infringement occurring by means of a peer to peer system known as the
BitTorrent protocol by subscribers and users of iiNet's services. The
information generated from these investigations was then sent to iiNet by
AFACT, with a demand that iiNet take action to stop the infringements
occurring. The measures which AFACT requested iiNet perform were never
precisely elucidated. However, as the evidence at trial indicated, AFACT
wanted iiNet to send a warning to the subscriber who was allegedly
infringing. If a warning was not sufficient to stop the infringement, AFACT
intended that iiNet suspend the internet service of that subscriber. If the
subscriber remained unco-operative, termination of the internet service was
sought as the ultimate sanction. In addition, or in the alternative, the
applicants suggested that iiNet should block certain websites."

It is these steps that ISOC-AU took exception to as it seems a denial of due
process of law.


Full text of the judgement can be found at:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/24.html

iiNet's response:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/iinetmediareleases/~3/sbX8VqvlU9I/20100402-fe
deral-court-judgement.pdf

here is the film industry's response:
http://www.afact.org.au/pressreleases/2010/4-02-2010.html

There are now a number of press articles out which a search will lead you
to.


MEDIA RELEASE

ISOC-AU applauds today's decision of the Australian Federal Court in the
case of Roadshow Films Pty Limited v iiNET Limited. The Court found that
iiNet, by failing to take any steps to stop infringing conduct, did not
'authorise' copyright infringement by certain iiNet users.. iiNet did not
sanction, approve or countenance copyright infringement; they did no more
than provide an Internet service to their customers.

ISOC-AU believes the Internet is for everyone. 'The Internet is an essential
part of how Australians live, work and play', said Narelle Clark, Vice
President of the Internet Society of Australia (ISOC-AU) 'and the Court has
confirmed that ISPs are not required to be the gatekeepers of Internet use'.

ISOC-AU also welcomes the finding of the Court that, because iiNet did have
a repeat infringer policy, they would have been entitled to the protection
offered by the 'safe harbour' provisions of the copyright legislation.

ISOC-AU recognises that people should be rewarded for their creative
endeavours and that other models may need to be used or developed to reward
content creation and distribution. We also support the right of all to due
process under law, particularly to ensure that Internet users are not
arbitrarily cut off from Internet access.



--


Narelle Clark
Vice President
ISOC-AU
_______________________________________________
Chapter-delegates mailing list
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates