Day 22: IIA attempt to intervene in iiNet copyright case dismissed

  • Email a Friend
  • Print Page
Day 22: IIA attempt to intervene in iiNet copyright case dismissed
"@apaulefont, why should the operator of a toll road establish a relationship with copyright holders who purport to have information that some trucks using the tollway may be carrying loads of EPRs ..."
 
Nov 26, 2009 12:07 PM
Tags: iinet | afact | iia | application | friend | court | amicus | curae

Nothing new to add.

The Internet Industry Association’s application to intervene in the copyright case between ISP iiNet and the film industry as a ‘friend of the court’ has been dismissed.

The decision was handed down by Justice Cowdroy on the final day of sitting in the Federal Court in Sydney.

The court was adjourned immediately following the decision to allow both sides time to digest the reasons for the dismissal.

The association’s chief had earlier in the week been subjected to a brief - but intense - cross-examination by the film industry, who accused the IIA of having “nothing new” to add to the case.

The film industry’s barrister Tony Bannon had urged Justice Cowdroy at the time to dismiss the application on that basis.

In a statement issued this afternoon, IIA chief executive, Peter Coroneos said the association was "naturally disappointed" but "heartened" by comments made by Justice Cowdroy in his decision.

The IIA quoted Cowdroy's decisions as saying: "If the IIA intended by its application for intervention to bring to the Court's attention the importance of its decision in these proceedings, it can take such fact as noted," Cowdroy noted in his decision.

"The Court is, and always has been, well aware of the ramifications of the outcome of its decision for ISPs, rights holders, and the development of the internet more broadly."

Coroneos said: “This is a very good outcome as the judge has acknowledged that he will consider the impacts on the broader industry which is what the IIA was keen to establish."

Earlier, the final day of proceedings resumed 45 minutes later than scheduled to enable the applicant's time to prepare their final written submissions.

The case continues. You can follow the case in-full here. For a background on the case, click here.


 
Comments: 13
Thoughts on this article? Add a comment below.
Digger11
Nov 26, 2009 12:37 PM
Good - IIA can crawl back into the deep and dark hole they appeared from.

iiNet are whinging about the cost of the case - but are happy to waste the courts time and money with this rubbish.!!!
Two-faced copmpany.
pete123
Nov 26, 2009 12:56 PM
Too right. These bloody industry associations should keep their collective noses out of this sort of thing. It's an issue between one private enterprise and ... oh ... hang on.
Rhino
Nov 26, 2009 1:03 PM
LOL @ Digger11 oh man the peace and serenity has been destroyed.

iiNet had nothing to do with IIA submitting to the courts, so the only people that could be seen as wasting time was IIA, not iiNet.

What you may not realise is that IIA also represents whatever internet provided you subscribe to. So go back and cry how you will never talk to Malone or Dalby ever again.
Sams
Nov 26, 2009 2:34 PM
Digger11; "Good - IIA can crawl back into the deep and dark hole they appeared from."

Right on - I mean, what would people like PIPE, Optus, Symantec, Telstra, Clayton Utz, D-Link, Ericsson, Facebook, Google, Vodafone, Rackspace, AusCERT, Microsoft, McAfee, AAPT, AARNet, Hutchison, etc. etc. know about the Internet and copyright law?? Oh wait ...
djzort
Nov 26, 2009 4:27 PM
Digger11 must be the one person that actually believes the film industry is some how hard done by.

At least all those stupid ads are convincing SOMEBODY.

anonymous
Nov 26, 2009 4:39 PM
Digger11 actually exists outside the stock library of the content corporations???
Johnny
Nov 26, 2009 7:31 PM
hey digger i think you've downloaded a copyrighted movie before - i have no proof, but im never wrong.

So by the way your thinking, i'm gonna contact your ISP and send them a notice and they'll disconnect you, so you can never ever troll again and download whatever disgusting crap gets you off becuase you don't have any (real) friends. Yeah i'd enjoy that system for getting pricks like you cut off :)

i've got something for the film industry:

if you are not making enough money then why are you still making movies when people go and download em for free?
and also you're not losing 20 bn per year, thats just a figure they've pulled out of their arse.
apaulefont
Nov 27, 2009 11:42 AM
I think if AFACT can provide the IP addresses of repeat offender accounts and iinet can match them up with the accounts, then i don't see a reason why copyright infringers shouldn't be disconnected. It doesn't seem like a difficult process to stop a crime that millions of people commit. It should be the account holders responsibility to ensure their home/business network is secure and all authorised users are prevented from downloading illegaly.
Sams
Nov 27, 2009 4:01 PM
apaulefont: "i don't see a reason why copyright infringers shouldn't be disconnected. It doesn't seem like a difficult process to stop a crime"

Do you see a problem with any of these:

1. Fred Bloggs reports you for being a child molester, and you get incarcerated without a trial?
2. Fred Bloggs reports you as being a terrorist and and your ISPs consequently reads all of you emails and intercepts your bank transactions to determine if its true. It turns out you weren't terrorist - oh well, your emails about your prostate problem were entertaining for the ISP staff party.
3. Assuming someone is guilty until proven innocent.

If you don't see a problem there, then perhaps you belong in a different country and a different time. Ethiopia might be right for you.
TruthSphere
Nov 27, 2009 6:24 PM
Digger11 you can't fool us, we are on this site because we are IT people, your opinions are laughable and uneducated.

I bet you absolutely are creaming over the idea of mandatory ISP filtering aswell..
apaulefont
Nov 30, 2009 12:28 PM
@ Sams

Obviously the ISP would need to use discretion in choosing which claims to investigate. The ISP would need to establish a relationship with the copyright holders and only act on claims of copyright infringment of their works.
Sams
Nov 30, 2009 12:51 PM
apaulefont: "Obviously the ISP would need to use discretion in choosing which claims to investigate. The ISP would need to establish a relationship with the copyright holders and only act on claims of copyright infringment of their works."

That would be open to a wide range of abuses:

1. "Obviously the ISP would need to use discretion in choosing which claims to investigate" - in other areas of law, such discretion is limited to authorised legal entities in Australia (e.g. federal police, customs officers, magistrates).

2. "only act on claims of copyright infringment of their works." - Aanyone that produces a 'work' (as defined in the copyright act - includes, text, images, video, computer code, etc. ...) is a copyright holder - it would be unfair to give special status to copyright holders that have the resources to cosy up to all of the ISPs.
anonymous
Nov 30, 2009 5:28 PM
@apaulefont, why should the operator of a toll road establish a relationship with copyright holders who purport to have information that some trucks using the tollway may be carrying loads of EPRs which could be used to record bootleg content?

You sound like another AFART troll.
Comment:
Want to participate in the discussion?
Or log in now to comment
 
 
 
Top Stories
TIO website hit by malware
Weekend malware runs one new process per target machine.
 
Microsoft announces Azure launch date
Australia in second wave of country releases.
 
CBA embarks on "database-as-a-service"
Analysis: How the bank intends to save megabucks.
 

Spotlightthe topics we're following

Latest Comments

"Hahahah...What a joke!! "Conroy had said that it was not possible to apply ISP-level filtering ..."
by gerson Feb 9, 2010 10:39 PM
 
"@@Comments, yes, and history keeps repeating itself. Remember the earlier pr-and-media-fuelled ..."
by anonymous Feb 9, 2010 6:40 PM
 
"I would have paid good money to be in court when that clanger dropped. Could you imagine, the ..."
by Private Citizen Feb 9, 2010 6:23 PM
 
"He is not yet listed on NBN Co. website as part of their team of executives (http://www.nbnco.com..."
by Private Citizen Feb 9, 2010 6:07 PM
 
"That would be the list leaked on wikileaks that the minister denied was the ACMA list. The same ..."
by Private Citizen Feb 9, 2010 5:17 PM
1) HTC Magic16 plans 2%
2) Nokia N9743 plans 9%
3) Nokia E7149 plans 1%
4) Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB30 plans 11%
5) Apple iPhone 8GB42 plans 5%
1) iiNet32 plans 5%
2) Netspace36 plans 11%
3) TPG Internet19 plans 14%
4) Optus33 plans 1%
5) Telstra BigPond30 plans 2%

Mobiles | Broadband | Credit Cards

iTnews

Polls

What is the sweet spot for Apple's entry 16GB Wi-Fi iPad?




   |   View results
$549
  78%
 
$579
  10%
 
$619
  4%
 
$649
  3%
 
$699
  5%
TOTAL VOTES: 381

Vote