Foxtel, Village and ISPs yet to agree on the cost of blocking pirate sites

Two-day Federal Court hearing to hear ISP evidence on costs

TPG (including subsidiaries such as iiNet), Telstra, Optus and M2 have confirmed they don’t intend to oppose Federal Court applications by Foxtel and Village Roadshow that seek to have the ISPs block their customers access a collection of piracy-linked websites.

However, the issue of how much it will cost ISPs to impose the website blocks remains in dispute between the parties.

The ISPs indicated at the initial court hearing that discussions on the proposed form of court orders — such as the precise form a site block must take — were still ongoing.

Solicitor Richard Lancaster, addressing the court today on behalf of the rights holders, told a directions hearing that while “there is substantial agreement” in respect to the court orders being sought, some issues are yet to be resolved.

“None of them relate to the core of the complaint,” Lancaster said.

In order to obtain a site blocking order Foxtel and Village must pass a number of legal hurdles, including proving they are the copyright holder or licensee and that the “primary purpose” of the sites they are targeting “is to infringe, or to facilitate the infringement of, copyright”.

Telstra told the court that it had no intention of contesting any issues about copyright infringement. “We don’t accept but we don’t contest,” the telco’s lawyer said, indicating it was a matter for the court to satisfy itself.

Telstra does want to present evidence on the costs of implementing site blocks, however. The telcos do not believe they should bear the cost of blocking sites.

Early estimates of costs varied significantly. TPG estimated it could cost $50 per domain, while M2 indicated it believed it could cost $400-$800 plus certain overhead costs.

Read more: It's time to future-proof Australia's copyright laws for the 21st century

The telcos also indicated there were some other issues to be resolved in regards to wording in the proposed court orders, such as wording related to implementing DNS blocking.

Foxtel and Village have launched separate but coordinated applications that target different sites. The applications are being heard jointly by the court.

Foxtel has sought to have ISPs block a number of sites linked to peer-to-peer copyright infringement: The Pirate Bay, Torrentz, TorrentHound and IsoHunt. Village in its application (which also lists as applicants Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, Paramount, Columbia, Universal and Warner Bros) is seeking to have Solar Movie blocked.

The applications for injunction are taking place under changes made last year to the Copyright Act. The actions by Foxtel and Village are the first under the site-blocking regime.

Shortly after Foxtel and Village launched their court actions, a number of music labels launched their own action targeting another major P2P piracy-linked site, Kickass Torrents.

A case management conference for that application will take place later this month.

A two day hearing of the Foxtel and Village applications has been scheduled for 23-24 June.

Computerworld has made available below copies of the three applications from rights holders.


Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags copyrightpiracycopyright infringement

Our Back to Business guide highlights the best products for you to boost your productivity at home, on the road, at the office, or in the classroom.

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

Rohan Pearce

Computerworld
Show Comments

Cool Tech

Crucial Ballistix Elite 32GB Kit (4 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 UDIMM

Learn more >

Gadgets & Things

Lexar® Professional 1000x microSDHC™/microSDXC™ UHS-II cards

Learn more >

Family Friendly

Lexar® JumpDrive® S57 USB 3.0 flash drive 

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Plox Star Wars Death Star Levitating Bluetooth Speaker

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

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.

Featured Content

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?