His Honour was right. The questions raised in the proceedings
are ongoing as the consortium of film and television companies have
now appealed the Full Federal Court decision to the High Court.
They seek to overturn the ruling that iiNet did not authorise the
acts of infringement that it knew occurred on its internet
View of Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft
A media release on the iiNet case issued
by AFACT stated: "The Full Federal Court unanimously
found that iiNet had the power to prevent the infringements of its
users from occurring and that there were reasonable steps it could
have taken, including issuing warnings". The film companies
will argue that "iiNet did have sufficient knowledge, that it
admitted the acts of infringement and that its CEO admitted on the
stand that the evidence was 'compelling'".
We will have to wait and see the outcome of the special leave
application before we know if the court case has reached the
end of the road. However, that may still not be the end of the
iiNet proposes a new framework for content provision
In response to the protracted court proceedings in this matter,
iiNet has suggested that "it's time for the film
and television industry and copyright holders to work with the
[internet] industry to make their content legitimately
available". More specifically, in an industry paper released
by iiNet last month, Encouraging legitimate use of Online Content -
An iiNet view, iiNet has called for copyright owners
to make their content more readily and cheaply available online and
for an independent body to be established to manage allegations of
copyright infringement and to determine any penalties.
In the introduction to the paper, iiNet argues: "We believe
the desire of rights holders to police infringements must also be
matched by a concomitant effort to improve access to legitimate
content, including by the use of new business models. iiNet does
not support or encourage any breaches of Australian law, including
infringement of the Copyright Act."
IIA stated: "Having closely reviewed the recent
decision of the Full Federal Court, we've concluded it's
both necessary and appropriate to develop a code of practice to
give a wider range of internet intermediaries greater certainty
around their legal rights and obligations. The iiNet case has
provided us with welcome guidance on where responsibilities should
begin and end, but falls short in defining reasonable steps
intermediaries should take in responding to allegations of
infringement by their users. The Code will address this
We are continuing to follow this important issue and will
provide further updates as it progresses.
Swaab Attorneys was the highest ranking law firm and the
13th best place to work in Australia in the 2010 Business Review
Weekly Best Places to Work Awards. The firm was a finalist in the
2010 BRW Client Choice Awards for client service and was named the
winner in the 2009 Australasian Legal Business Employer of Choice
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Businesses that rely on email or SMS for marketing purposes need to be aware of, and comply with, the Spam Act 2003.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).