AFACT, a consortium of 34 film production companies, including the world’s largest movie studios, has announced plans to appeal a recently lost landmark piracy case against Australian ISP, iiNet.
The original decision, which was passed down earlier this month by Justice Cowdry of the Australian Federal Court, said that by simply allowing bit torrent traffic that infringed copyright, iiNET was not in fact infringing copyright themselves.
This decision was met with applause from around the world as it set a common-sense precedent for the treatment of ISPs in relation to data that infringed copyright which passed over their networks.
Despite that the Hollywood studios have decided to appeal the decision.
iiNet have issued a press release in response expressing their obvious disappointment at AFACT’s decision.
iiNET’s CEO, Michael Malone had this to say about the appeal:
“It is more than disappointing and frustrating that the studios have chosen this unproductive path,”
He also went on to add:
“This legal case has not stopped one illegal download and further legal appeals will not stop piracy. The studios themselves admitted during the court hearings that making content freely and cheaply available online was an effective way to combat piracy.(As such) a more effective approach would be for the studios to make their content more readily and cheaply available online,”
Despite the fact that iiNET ought to have been an easy target for AFACT to bully (it’s a 2nd tier ISP which did AUD$37M in EBITDA last financial year and legal costs for the last case were approximately AUD$4M), iiNET continues to fight the good fight for ISPs all over the world.
Here’s hoping the Full Court of the Federal Court agree with Justice Cowdry and stop this ridiculous litigation from going any further.
I think AFACT chose iiNet particularly because they're a small ISP. They thought they could bully iiNet into a loss, setting a precedent for other courts to follow around the world. So, now they're not only stupid and greedy, but are equating themselves with a schoolyard bully that tries to pick on the little guy.
I like how they described a way to solve piracy in their case, but are unwilling to actually implement it. Instead, they'd rather try to put legal responsibility on ISPs, so that they can find a way to fine them, or block bittorrent, allowing them to keep overcharging for movies. The problem here is that even if bittorrent were blocked, a new technology would be developed that would allow the continued piracy of movies.
Also… blocking bittorrent isn't going to stop the very lively bootleg business in Asia, were bootleg movies are sold at about 1 USD apiece on DVDs.