Batman to aid AFACT in iiNet copyright case

The representative body will be presenting evidence from a number of popular films in the Court case against ISP, iiNet

The Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has tabled an outline of its submission to the Federal Court for its landmark case against iiNet. According to the document, specific evidence from a group of films, including Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, will be presented in the trial.

AFACT is suing iiNet for copyright infringement, claiming the Internet service provider (ISP) was willingly negligent in allowing users to pirate films through BitTorrent and peer-to-peer (P2P) networks. It is working on behalf of several different movie studios.

The summary of the AFACT’s 90-page outline of opening submissions (AFACT was unable to provide the full document), sighted by ARN, details that:

  • The 34 applications (studios and television networks) are seeking relief against the respondent pursuant to the Copyright Act 1968;
  • The plaintiff will be submitting specific evidence in relation to numerous high profile films including
  • Batman Begins, its sequel The Dark Knight, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and Mamma Mia!, along with television shows such as The Simpsons, Heroes, Prison Break and Bones;
  • Since July 2008, AFACT has served weekly notices of infringement providing details of specific acts of numerous and repeated violation of copyright with supporting information gathered through a monitoring process;
  • Contravening copyright on the applicants’ films deprives them from generating revenue, which is exacerbated by varying release dates in different countries;
  • The plaintiff will use previously successful copyright cases against P2P system provider, Shaman, and website operator, Cooper to justify its case.

AFACT also renewed its accusations of iiNet’s negligence. It claimed the ISP “rewarded” its users for continued patronage by ignoring their copyright infringements.

“iiNet’s own evidence shows that it has made a conscious decision in this regard, weighing in the balance the fact of infringement of the applications’ rights as against its own profits; it sided with the latter,” AFACT stated in the outline. “Through its inactivity and indifference, iiNet has in every relevant sense permitted a situation to develop and continue where users of its Internet services are free to engage in infringements of the applicants’ copyright.

"[iiNet] has also encouraged heavy users of its network to upgrade their services, thereby increasing profits. In other words, iiNet has allowed a widespread culture of infringement to become entrenched."

AFACT also claimed that the defendant had not honoured the terms and conditions of its customer relationship agreement (CRA) with its customers. The CRA stipulates customers must comply with the law and must not use the service for illicit activities.

iiNet has refused to comment, stating it was too close to the court date to divulge any information. The ISP has previously defended itself with claims AFACT was expecting them to do the impossible.

“They send us a list of IP addresses and say ‘this IP address was involved in a breach on this date’. We look at that say ‘Well what do you want us to do with this? We can't release the person’s details to you on the basis of an allegation and we can't go and kick the customer off on the basis of an allegation from someone else’,” iiNet CEO, Michael Malone, said. “So we say ‘You are alleging the person has broken the law; we’re passing it to the police. Let them deal with it’.

“[This traffic] is transiting our network along with the billions of other things passing across the network which are perfectly legal. We are not traffic cops. We can't stand in the middle of it and stop the individual items that might be against the law. These guys are asking us to be judge, jury and executioner.”

Both parties have been busy preparing their cases, enlisting the help of various expert witnesses.

Internet Industry Association (IIA) has also shown interest in entering the case as amicus curiae, a ‘friend of the court’, but has been met with opposition from AFACT.

The trial commences in the Federal Court on October 6.

2014 ARN Women in ICT Awards - Nominate Now!: Nominations have opened for WIICTA 2014 and will stay open until October 22. But don't be late, be among the first in and NOMINATE NOW!!!

Tags Harry Potter and the Order of the PhoenixPrison BreakAustralian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT)The Dark KnightThe SimpsonsHeroesiiNetMamma Mia!CooperBatman BeginsInternet Industry Association (IIA)Shaman

More about ACTARNCRAIIAIinetInternet Industry AssociationPhoenix




AFACT's response to iiNet's evidence

Apparently AFACT's responses to iiNet's evidence has been withheld from the documents released above - I have reason to believe that AFACT will use the Chewbacca defense to disprove iiNet's evidence. That will, obviously, be the most credible part of AFACT's case...




This is the most ridiculous ever in history and I hope AFACTS looses big or someone blows them up from the face of the earth FOREVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I buy a magazine at the newsagent and then I pass it to my neighbour and so on, and he or she passess it to someone else,etc,etc.
So the local council gets sued for allowing people on the local roads to take the magazine from house to house.

MY AFACTS STOP CHARGING 29 DOLLARS FOR A DVD and you will see how all of these goes away !!!!!





Next thing they'll be suing the power companies for providing the power to the computers that download the pirate movies...



whats the chewbacca defense?



Chewbacca Defense



Secons Thoughts

Sometime all of us, including me have bad memory.

Let's go back to the days of VCR's. Channel 9 or any other would broadcast on free to air a film and you would tape it.
Yes,it takes hours and then someone would want to watch it since they were not home so you would give them yours of maybe with two VCR's you would do a copy.
Takes time.

Today's internet connections are coming up to speed and if NBN or whatever name you want to call it comes along at 100 Base T equivalent............time is ultra short.

So this is part of a control environment that this people wants to achieve.
In the past there was no need since not many had VCR's at some stage but took too long so this was sporadic.

I am not sure if you understand what I really mean here.
It is long term.
This people plan long term control.
Sadly as humanity this is not different than Hitler or the KGB or the cancer of the planet (USA).

Civil liberties?

Who has muscles and M16 will kill first.............

Nothing has changed........we humans are the worst animals.

Mr Anderson


Batman is actually the villan! and so is AFACT!

Okay, bear with me here. Watch "The Dark Knight".

If you carefully watch the movie and have a very open mind you will notice something. Yes, it's a bit schizophrenic, but keep it together, and you'll realise something.

Batman is actually the VILLAN. He's stupidly rich, and lives a life of luxury, while everyone else suffers and is poor, but they think he's their hero. He's guilty for having so much money, and feels compelled to fight for justice. Everyone else wants Batman's power/ability (think "money"), so they like him, because they want to be like him.

The Joker can see how unfair this is and doesn't cope. Like Batman, he hates criminals, but can sympathise with them, because, IT'S UNFAIR that BATMAN has EVERYTHING and can have WHATEVER HE WANTS. Yet they can't. They can find a way, but technically it's illegal.

The PROBLEM is the MONETARY SYSTEM. The monetary system causes the crime. Everyone should have access to everything regardless of how much money they have or earn. This is why the Joker burns the money, and possibly a reason why Heath Ledger was having trouble dealing with his character, and overdosed on medication. He came to realise how corrupt this whole world and system is.

I feel like I've done the defence lawyers job, but would we then be putting the whole monetary system on trial? That would be great! Either way; copyright has NO PLACE in the 21st century. It is backwards thinking.

Everyone should have access to every piece of information for free. It costs no-one anything when someone copies something. The only loss is THEORETICAL, with the greed of potentially missing money driving this court case. Some people can only keep their sanity by having access to all the information that is significant to them. How upset do you get when you can't refer to a piece of information when you are trying to explain something to someone. Our culture is so evolved and so complex that denying access to information (based on how much money you have) is sick and disgusting.

It can be hard, which is why the films are being used as evidence! However, it will be their own demise... BUT is a lawyer going to fight AGAINST the monetary system? Probably not, as they're usually the most greedy and corrupt people in society.

It's a double win or a double loss either way.

Poor people may be more at risk of developing a mental illness, and having free access to all information may help them deal with their issues. Especially if they're trying to describe information and events to others. If they can get through their problems with all these free resources, then it is a benefit for everyone.

By dropping copyright completely we can move forward as a society. By keeping it, we're only holding people down.



you sir are a genius.
i have

you sir are a genius.
i have never seen batman so eloquently interpreted,



The Dark Knight was the highest grossing movie of last year taking over 1B US at the box office

Does anybody else see the irony that AFACT is going to use this movie to argue that some people somehwhere 'lost' money due to a download.

Even their name is misleading. Copyright infringment is not theft and therefore not a fact either. Neither are the bogus numbers the indusrty likes to trot out regarding the 'cost' of downloading. Just because someone downloads it does not mean they would have ever paid for it so counting that as a lost sale is just plain worng.

Good luck to them. They are only hastening their own demise.



If you're restricting yourself to the legal definition of theft then it's correct that copyright infringement is not theft, but the label <em>is</em> helpful in understanding what copyright infringement is - depriving artist of income etc. Also true that a download doesn't necessarily translate into a lost sale (some might, most I'd guess would not) so I'd agree those numbers are bogus.

Nevertheless, a price has been set and if you're not willing to pay that price then you shouldn't copy it either. Just because you've justified it within your own mind (eg. costs too much, the studio already makes enough money anyway, just one copy won't make a difference, whatever ..) doesn't make it any more OK.

But having said all that I do think the lawsuit is a joke. AFACT are asking ISPs to judge the validity of a copyright claim, which is something they're not equipped to do. If a copyright infringement claim is proven in the courts, then it might be appropriate to ask ISPs to disconnect, but what they're proposing is just stupid.




Someone please give corporate greed a massive kick in the nuts.

This is not negligence at all, this reminds me of the law suit in the states that went something like this;

"Mrs X sued Ted's Hardware stores alleging that she was attacked by a wild bird in the car park. She claims Ted's Hardware is responsible as they allowed 'wild' birds to fly around 'freely' on their property."



Depression articles

every hour the thoroughgoing amount of people suffering depression grows at a proportion rank of knots. The reasons are rare, but consequences of the problem are bordering on the same. The person became gruff, enthusiastic, with a muffled animation level; feels abbreviated and burnt-out. At the beginning the dumps symptoms are racking seen, as a rule we notice them too recent

Comments are now closed


Latest News

Gigamon signs VARs to support Arrow distribution partnership
Revel forms tech alliance with Deputy
Avnet clinches Lenovo global distribution deal
Steve Wozniak to teach at UTS
More News
22 Oct
NewLease & Microsoft Technical Sessions
23 Oct
NewLease & Red Hat Breakfast Briefing (Sydney)
23 Oct
NewLease & Microsoft Technical Sessions
29 Oct
NewLease & Microsoft Technical Sessions
View all events