The Communications Alliance has filed submissions seeking High Court of Australia permission to intervene in the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) online copyright case against iiNet as amicus curiae (friend of the court), as the organisation believes the Court’s deliberation has implications for internet service providers (ISPs) and internet users.
The Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) will lodge an appeal with the High Court as part of its ongoing allegation that Perth-based internet service provider iiNet had allowed its users to infringe on the copyright of the film studios the body represents.
Aims to encourage legitimate use of online content
The ICT community is coming to grips with the implications of the latest outcome in the ongoing battle between film right holders and internet service providers over copyright infringement, with legal briefings set to be heard over the next few weeks for industry personnel.
The Federal Attorney-General, Robert McLelland, has signalled moves to expand provisions harbouring internet service and online content providers from litigation by copyright holders.
Service providers, rights holders and internet users are anxiously awaiting news of whether the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) will further appeal the decision against it today by the Federal Court, but both the industry body and defendant iiNet are clear on a single message: The Federal Government must step in.
The Federal Court today dismissed an appeal by Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) in its claim that Perth-based internet service provider iiNet had infringed on the copyrights of the film studios the body represents.
Internet service provider, iiNet’s (ASX:IIN) has recorded revenue growth of 13 per cent to $474 million for the full year to 30 June 2010.
The appeal case between Internet service provider, iiNet and the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has come to a close after four days, with the panel of judges expected to reveal its decision sometime after 20 August, pending further documents from legal counsel.
Legal counsel for the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has argued that the account holder should be held accountable for alleged copyright infringement, even if they weren’t the one to actually download infringing material.
It has been revealed that iiNet’s defence of 'reasonable belief' against acting on evidence of copyright infringement was potentially based on a misinterpretation of relevant legislation.
Suggestions by the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) that ISPs terminate users after a single copyright infringement warning would be unsustainable, iiNet’s legal team has told a Federal Court this week.
The information pertaining to copyright infringements delivered to Internet service provider iiNet by the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) during 2008 was of questionable reliability, a Federal Court has heard.
The ongoing legal battle between iiNet and the Australia Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) is [[artnid:346727|back in the Federal court this week.|new]] AFACT [[artnid:337479|launched an appeal|new]] back in February after the judge overseeing the much-publicised copyright case, Justice Cowdroy, dismissed the case, following a five-month investigation that uncovered instances of copyright infringements by users of iiNet’s services.
The case raises the question of whether ISPs should be held accountable for the actions of its users?
The Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has told a Federal Court hearing that iiNet should have shaped, blocked or play-penned subscribers who infringed copyright.