Appeal Of Important iiNet vs. AFACT Case Begins
from the rehearing-the-same-thing dept
As you may recall, a bunch of movie studios sued popular ISP iiNet for failing to somehow wave a magic wand and stop file sharing. Thankfully, the Australian court quickly realized this was ridiculous and issued a thorough and convincing ruling that it made no sense to consider iiNet liable for copyright infringement done by its users. The judge pointed out that there’s no evidence that iiNet “approved infringement.” The judge also made it clear why it’s nonsensical to think that ISPs should serve as copyright cops, since a determination on whether or not something is infringing takes place in a court, not by random ISP employees.
Not surprisingly, the movie studios and AFACT (the “anti-piracy” organization representing them) appealed the ruling, claiming that somehow the lack of stopping copyright infringement was effectively “authorizing” copyright infringement. That seems like a huge stretch, but the appeal has begun and AFACT is now trying to make the case that not blocking users or kicking them off is the equivalent of authorization. Hopefully the appeals court recognizes the wisdom of the lower court ruling.
Filed Under: australia, copyright, isps, secondary liability, studios
Companies: afact, iinet
Comments on “Appeal Of Important iiNet vs. AFACT Case Begins”
Thanks :)
I hadn’t heard anything on this yet, appreciate the heads up.
Uber pedant mode, your quote should have the full stop on the outside.. ‘that iiNet “approved infringement.” The ‘/ Swap the . and ” and should be lovely. Sorry someone else will if I don’t.
Re: Thanks :)
Not in American English.
Re: Thanks :)
who cares about full stops grammer nazi
I don’t agree is that important, is just one more day in the playground.
ASSFACT is not thinking about the future, when people start using the internet for other things that will have a real impact and change how we interact with the world again.
If I was iiNet I would make a video of children having a monthly talk with their doctor in a rural area and showing why it is to aggressive to disconnect people from the internet, besides of course the obvious that no layman can know what is against the law or not and punishing third parties for acts of others is just plain ridiculous if their are not really promoting breaking the law.
Would ASSFACT disconnect children from healthcare?
“American rules place periods and commas inside the quotation marks all the time.”
Re: Re:
The Grammar Nazi’s at my school insist on APA format which places the period outside the quotes.
Re: Re: Re:
Inside, outside, inside, outside this periodic movement in societal rules is just obscene.
@#5
A’nd wha’t do’es the’ A’P’A’ forma’t sa’y ab’out ex’tra’ne’ous’ ap’ost’ro’phe’s?
If the studios didn’t make the movie/music then it wouldn’t be copied. They are contributing to the infringement and need to stop.
AFACT - their memebers rip off their artists and post bogus surveys.
Thieves? It’s the members of AFACT that are cooking the books, and ripping off their own artists…..
The fact that they are trying to fence everyone into their their greedy and “corporate moron” distribution methods, kind of shows them up for the thieving lying hypocrites they really are.
http://torrentfreak.com/tech-news-sites-tout-misleading-bittorrent-piracy-study-100724/ [torrentfreak.com]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100708/02510310122.shtml [techdirt.com]
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-disney-20100708,0,4051564.story [latimes.com]
Murder
Since AFACT has failed to stop all murders we can conclude that they must have authorized all murders, right?
Personalizlinks of london e a gift by engraving something spelinks of london jewellery cial. Traditional, lovely, and still popular, blinks of london charms angles are a wlinks of london silver onderful special gift for family and any time of the year. Placing a picture of a husband, child,
Texting While Driving
In the same way, I plan on demanding to know if the next person who rear ends my vehicle was texting at the precise moment of the collision. Then I plan to sue the crap out of their insurance company (if they have an insurance company) because it should be the responsibility of the insurance companies to make sure they demand that the people they insure DO NOT TEXT WHILE DRIVING. If the laws aren’t going to be written forbidding the insane unsafe practice of this horrible technology while operating a motor vehicle on public highways, then I will sue the lawmakers as well for gross negligence.
Texting While Driving
Also, I will sue their phone carrier if the carrier refuses to comply with my request for precise disclosure of the user’s actions at the time of the collision.