Bannon won't front AFACT's iiNet appeal

 

New barrister named.

The film industry's star barrister Tony Bannon will not lead the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft's (AFACT) appeal against ISP iiNet in the Federal Court next week.

AFACT lodged a last minute appeal against a Federal Court judgement in February which had exonerated iiNet for the copyright infringing activities of its subscribers.

The film industry's case hinges on 15 grounds, according to appeal documents.

Bannon - who became known in the case for his vigorous cross-examination of iiNet chief Michael Malone - was understood to be preparing to front a different appeal case starting the following week.

It was understood that Bannon remained on the film industry's legal team but was unlikely to appear in person.

David Catterns QC would instead front the film industry's appeal. Catterns is a specialist in IP, appellate and administrative law.

A spokesman for iiNet told iTnews that its barrister representation was unchanged. Richard Cobden SC will lead the ISP's appeal submissions.

The appeal starts next week. Stay tuned to iTnews for full coverage from the court.

For a complete history of the case, click here.


Bannon won't front AFACT's iiNet appeal
"It would be difficult, but a boycott of the worst of the AFACT (I like @anonymous typo better) players would drive the point home. Why aren't some of the ICT population making comparisons with ..."
By Pilotyoda
 
 
 
Comments: 3
Ezy2Confuze
Jul 29, 2010 2:46 PM
So when they lose this appeal with their high priced IP specialist leading the charge, will they cry poor and try to have iiNet pay their legal bills again?
anonymous
Jul 29, 2010 7:21 PM

Dunno about the "poor" bit, considering that AFART appears to be a front for some of the wealthiest content corporations.

But they may seek to impose maximum cost and disruption on iiNet if they again fail to make good much their case and win significant parts of their assault on the ISP.
Pilotyoda
Aug 1, 2010 1:06 PM
It would be difficult, but a boycott of the worst of the AFACT (I like @anonymous typo better) players would drive the point home.

Why aren't some of the ICT population making comparisons with Common Carrier laws:
Australia Post, the phone companies, Federal and State Roads and Rail Authorities (including private toll companies) and shipping companies are nOT responsible for the illegal activities of the users. The users are responsible for breaking the law.
Or should Vic Roads (or the minister - ha) be prosecuted because someone puts drugs, fireworks or xxx videos in their boot and drives from Canberra to Melbourne?
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
iTnews on tour: The Executive Summit Series
Join us in Sydney and Melbourne to meet Australia's tech leaders.
 
NBN Co braces for secrecy probe
Opinion: Is commercial sensitivity a catch-all?
 
Exclusive: NBN Co withholds fibre upgrade price
Fears trial details could breach contractor confidentiality.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Was your 2012 IT budget...




   |   View results
Cut by less than ten percent?
  17%
 
Cut by more than ten percent?
  34%
 
Flat
  26%
 
Increased by less than ten percent?
  7%
 
Increased by more than ten percent?
  15%
TOTAL VOTES: 350

Vote
Will you still use DropBox and other cloud storage in the wake of the Megauploads saga?

   |   View results
Yes
  63%
 
No
  37%
TOTAL VOTES: 229

Vote