The battle between the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft and Perth-based ISP iiNet will finally come to an end on Thursday, when the Federal Court hands down its decision on the case that will change the face of the telco and internet industries.
Companies and judiciaries around the world will be awaiting the outcome of the case, which will determine whether internet providers have a responsibility to catch and disconnect users from their networks who are downloading and sharing copyrighted materials.
Federal Court judge Cowdroy will hand down his decision at 9.30 AEST on Thursday, February 4, in a move that will determine the future of the internet industry.
If AFACT – a collection entertainment companies including 20th Century Fox, Village Roadshow and Paramount – wins the case, it would have major ramifications for the rest of the industry. ISPs would then be held responsible for what users download on their networks, and may even be forced to disconnect violators from their service.
If iiNet wins it would set a precedent that ISPs have no legal responsibility to catch and punish digital pirates.
iiNet company executives have told SmartCompany throughout the trial they are confident of a win. However, AFACT representatives have also expressed similar confidence.
AFACT, which represents a number of entertainment companies including 20th Century Fox, Roadshow Entertainment and Paramount, have sued iiNet saying the company had a responsibility to stop offenders.
However, iiNet have responded to these claims saying it is the responsibility of the Federal Police to bring copyright violators to justice. The company has said it passed on copyright violation notifications to police, but did not pursue any disciplinary action themselves.
AFACT demonstrated BitTorrent technology in the Federal Court to show how copyright violators could be tracked, but iiNet attempted to show
Over several weeks of hearings, AFACT made several claims including that iiNet users were taking advantage of the company’s “FreeZone” bandwidth in order to download illegal materials.
However, iiNet countered many of these claims, saying that one of the companies involved in the case actually struck a deal to provide content on the no-bandwidth “FreeZone”.
iiNet also attacked AFACT’s claim there had been thousands of alleged copyright violations. Instead, iiNet counsel Richard Cobden demonstrated that due to the inaccurate counting process used by the federation, the violations were likely to be “in the hundreds”.
The company also said AFACT investigators could have acted illegally when obtaining files for the case.
Similar technical debates played a heavy part in the case, with Cowdroy actually requesting a demonstration of BitTorrent technology and how a user would download an illegally copied file.
Whatever the outcome, the losing party is likely to appeal the case.
Patrick Stafford is a freelance journalist and a former deputy editor of SmartCompany.
