The anti-piracy group saw iiNet’s action as a contention of the initial ruling.
"No matter what spin [the ISP] try to put on it, iiNet is appealing this judgment too,” an AFACT spokesperson said in a statement. “iiNet is trying to shore up [its] defence to the claim of authorisation of copyright theft because if the decision on authorisation is revered on appeal [the company] will be liable.”
The notice iiNet has filed contains 14 grounds of contention.
iiNet said in a statement it is only trying to have the Federal Court reconsider two aspects of the original decision:
- Pertaining to Section 112E of the Copyright Act 1968, iiNet want to confirm it, as a carriage service provider, can not be held accountable to copyright infringement on its network. Previously, Justice Cowdroy was unable to confirm this due to the precedent set by a copyright case in 2006, Cooper v Universal Music Australia .
- Justice Cowdroy had ruled Part 13 of the Telecommunications Act prohibiting iiNet from disclosing information of customers to AFACT but exceptions applied. The ISP wants the Federal Court to reverse this so exceptions cannot be applied.
iiNet has fired back at AFACT’s statements, claiming the anti-piracy organisation’s appeal to the court gave the ISP a legitimate opportunity to strengthen the judgment laid down in February.
“We are not appealing the judgment; it was unequivocal,” iiNet chief regulatory officer, Steve Dalby, said. “It was in our favour and dismissed AFACT’s claims against us, awarding us cost, so I can’t see how it can be anything less."
Dalby said AFACT’s latest comments were merely an attention-seeking tactic.
“The case was brought forward by AFACT, not iiNet so for them to give these dismissive comments just proves the group is in it for publicity,” he said.
Dalby highlighted Justice Cowdroy had “sympathised” with iiNet.
AFACT represented a number of high-profile movie studios in the piracy cased against iiNet.
AFACT appealed in February after presiding Judge, Justice Dennis Cowdroy, ruled in favour of iiNet for not authorising movie piracy by its users.