Optus wins Telstra confidentiality breach ruling

 

Can seek profits as damages.

Optus has won the right to seek a percentage of Telstra's profits in damages after the Federal Court found Telstra breached confidentiality when it used Optus' call information to prepare market share reports.

The ruling was made by the full bench of the Federal Court yesterday.

Optus alleged the reports "formed the basis of marketing and advertising attacks in the long distance call market to lure Optus customers back to Telstra and gain market share".

It was unclear if Telstra would appeal the judgment.

A Telstra spokesman told iTnews: "We are still reviewing the judge's decision and have yet to make a decision as to whether to appeal or not."

Optus director of government and corporate affairs Maha Krishnapillai labelled the ruling a "significant victory".

"Optus will now move to quantify our entitlement to contractual damages (which we expect to be significant) and also seek to pursue Telstra for an ‘account of profits' that were gained by their use of our confidential traffic information," Krishnapillai said.

Optus lodged an appeal last month after previous judgments did not rule on the issue of whether or not confidence was breached.

Yesterday's outcome meant Telstra breached its access agreement contract with Optus and misused the telco's confidential traffic information.

Telstra had disputed whether the data was confidential. It argued it owned the information because, in the 1990s, "Optus' customers were Telstra's."

Optus was already pursuing damages over the contract breach.

Another reason for separation

Krishnapillai said the case was a "good example of how Telstra has a very real ability to act unfairly under the present regulatory system."

"This result shows that without full, transparent and independently assessed structural separation Telstra will have an ongoing opportunity to seek to significantly damage competition to benefit its own agenda," Krishnapillai said.

"It is disappointing that Telstra was prepared to misuse confidential information in an effort to stifle competition," he said.

"It's [also] unfortunate that Optus has had to spend many years in court getting justice when this all could have been avoided if the regulatory separation had happened many years ago."


Optus wins Telstra confidentiality breach ruling
"@Bob Telstra: Traffic and customer information is not ho hum, it should be kept confidential by the wholesaler who is being paid by the retailing telco in a contractual arrangement. If you, say, ..."
By anonymous
 
 
 
Comments: 5
sydneyla
Mar 6, 2010 7:07 AM
Talk about fiddling while Rome burns. Surely Mr Krishnapillai can see, along with Telstra, Optus is in danger of being driven to be a worthless company dominated and regulated by a Government monopolistic NBN Co.
Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu)
Mar 6, 2010 11:05 PM
Sydney, the answer is to use the NBN Co opportunity to now do the separation that Howard/Alston should have done at the start. I wrote to Alston twelve years ago saying that if the issue was not addressed then, it would remain a major frustration to the industry going forward. Telstra fought it, but in the end Telstra shareholders were duped by the fact that separation of wholesale and retail had to happen for any competitive environment to succeed. The fact that Telstra could not keep to a confidentiality agreement is simply Telstra highlighting why the current arrangement does not work, and why full separation is needed. And NBN Co allows that to happen in a realistic way, with T2 Telstra investors etc looked after reasonably... though they were foolish to accept Howard's transparently-illogical assurances.

However, ever since T2, Telstra has done "everything in its power" to confirm how the present arrangement is defective. Yes much was at Sol's insistence. But refusing to set reasonable wholesale prices, to dragging its feet in all compliance issues... Telstra really wanted to prove how it could not be trusted.
anonymous
Mar 8, 2010 9:45 AM

You only have to look at how Telstra has used its huge cashflow and endless legalistic gaming to see the similarity to classic monopoly behaviour.

It's true the Howard government did nothing to control these proclivities, either structurally or administratively, but it was actually comms minister Beazeley who created the basic configuration of the monster.
Bob
Mar 8, 2010 3:39 PM
Traffic information? Ho hum. What has that got to do with any of the other issues dragged in? Surely with all the handouts some other telco out there can make some sort of impact on their own initiative.
anonymous
Mar 8, 2010 4:54 PM

@Bob Telstra:
Traffic and customer information is not ho hum, it should be kept confidential by the wholesaler who is being paid by the retailing telco in a contractual arrangement.

If you, say, enter into a contract to send parcels by road carrier, they are still your parcels and the carrier has no right to interfere with the parcels or use your business info for their own purposes, other than for the agreed delivery of the parcels.

Perhaps the old PMG monopoly mentality is still alive in the incumbent corporation involved?
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Windows 8: Under the hood
Part One of iTnews' enterprise guide to Windows 8.
 
iTnews on tour: The Executive Summit Series
Join us in Sydney and Melbourne to meet Australia's tech leaders.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  94%
 
No
  6%
TOTAL VOTES: 35

Vote