AFACT v iiNet: ISP draws on TV copyright battle

ISP continued its closing arguments in the landmark copyright court case

Internet service provider (ISP) iiNet continued to draw on a 2002 copyright case between Channel 9 and Channel 10 over segments broadcast on The Panel as part of its case against the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT).

AFACT, who represents over 30 Hollywood film studios and TV stations, is suing iiNet and claimed a 59-week investigation into the ISP and its customers discovered "rampant copyright infringements".

While continuing to deliver closing submissions to the Federal Court of Australia, iiNet barrister Richard Cobden SC highlighted the 2002 case.

Cobden argued that the files of BitTorrent downloads are broken into parts that are not “substantial” enough to be deemed copyright, which echoes The Panel case of 2004.

Channel Nine sued Channel Ten over copyright infringement under the Copyright Act 1968, and alleged that the infringement took place through the broadcast of short segments of Channel Nine programs on variety television show The Panel.

The case of 2002 showed that copyright infringement took place when a “substantial part” of the subject matter was broadcast

At the time, Channel 10 applied the defence that it had not conducted copyright infringement because the segments taken from Channel 9 were not substantial in terms of quantity and quality.

Cobden said that out of the 11 clips which made up a “substantial part” of Channel 9’s programs, the judge ruled that only three were substantial.

Cobden also said that there are no records of the downloaded segments of the Pineapple Express film which amount to a “substantial part”.

The case continues.

Sign up for Computerworld's newsletters to stay up to date.

Got more on this story?Email Computerworld or follow @computerworldau on Twitter and let us know.

Tags AFACT v iiNetchannel 10channel 9

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Kathryn Edwards

Computerworld

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Shopping.com

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?