Privacy advocates have expressed their concern over a draft consultation paper that was posted in error on the Attorney-General’s website that refers to possible discussion over whether the Government should make it easier for copyright holders to get details of alleged infringers.
While the Government has removed the paper from its website and replaced it with another that does not refer to any such practice, privacy groups believe the fact such a move is being considered is disturbing.
The mix-up comes as internet service provider iiNet prepares to battle the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft, which contains a number of Hollywood studio members, in a December High Court case.
Last week, the Attorney-General’s department released a consultation paper on its website, “Revising the Scope of the Copyright Safe Harbour Scheme & the Process of Seeking ISP Subscriber Details In copyright Infringement Matters”.
In this particular paper, the Government notes it is seeking comments on whether there is any need to establish “a more streamlined process for copyright owners to obtain subscriber details from internet service providers for legal proceedings”.
It notes there may be advantages in considering such a scheme, although any process would still require judicial oversight. Currently, this process is organised through the court system, although studios say this is expensive and tedious.
This paper, which the department calls a draft, was replaced with the current version which does not make any reference to streamlining court procedures. Instead, it focuses solely on safe harbour schemes.
“The issues of illegal file sharing and safe-harbouring are being worked through separately to ensure industry and the community are able to properly feed into any changes,” a spokesperson said.
However, that move hasn’t stopped privacy advocates from becoming alarmed. Privacy advocate and former Electronic Frontiers Australia spokesman Geordie Guy told SmartCompany the content in the paper is “certainly some alarming stuff”.
“It does appear there is consideration of these types of processes behind closed doors, whereas the court system we have now is quite open.”
“I guess in a way it was expected this would happen, particularly with the way things are going with cases like iiNet and AFACT, and particularly the division amongst ISPs as to how they deal with this issue.”
The Pirate Party of Australia has also expressed its concern in a statement, saying it will continue to publish a submission to the full discussion paper.
Guy says while it is unclear whether the department is actually considering such a move, he says it does appear similar to some methods applied in the United States, where a number of studios have been eager to identify individual downloaders of copyrighted material.
“Whether this was a draft means the Government is still considering this or not, that’s unclear. But certainly the mention of it is alarming.”
Patrick Stafford is a freelance journalist and a former deputy editor of SmartCompany.
