Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Feb 2010 23:13 UTC
Legal "In a definitive defeat for film studios - and in a first case of its kind worldwide - Australia's Federal Court has ruled that ISPs have no obligation to act on copyright infringement notices or to disconnect subscribers after receiving multiple letters. If copyright holders want justice for illegal file-sharing, they need to start by targeting the right people: those who committed the infringement."
Permalink for comment 407950
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
urkrobshaw
Member since:
2009-02-01

Ars Technica <snip.>
Quite surprisingly, they have a subscription service <snip.>
Wonder how they would feel if their copyrighted material were downloaded and shared with a few million people?
<snip.>
You don't suppose they would have a problem with that, would you? Or would they wake up and realize how much it sucks to be on the receiving end of copyright theft?


They probably wouldn't like it. But they wouldn't sue AT&T, Bell, AOL, Time Warner, Road Runner etc (sorry if some of them aren't ISP's ... I'm from Australia!) for providing internet access.

They would sue the person reading the copyright stolen material, or more logically the host of the copyright breached content who is "making available" the content without permission.

The movie studios, through an Australian agency, were suing the ISP for providing internet access, not the torrent tracker / torrent search engine / person downloading the breached material.

To date, nobody has actually even proved that the material they claim was breaching their copyright, was actuall breaching their copyright.

The ISP did the correct thing. An allegation of an illegal act was given to them, they forwarded every allegation to the law enforcement to investigate.
The police felt there was no illegal act / insufficient evidence, and did not request more details from the ISP to investigate the end users.

Reply Parent Score: 3