are you not descendants of a prison colony YEA lets put them back in there cages

thats what Hollystupid has done to Australians

I have also used the “Smith & Wesson” analogy and argued about highways full of get-away cars. Unfortunately, such comparisons break down when companies like iiNet and TPB fail to act as common carriers.

A common carrier would not pry into the usage of their network at all so that they maintain plausible deniability. However, in TPB case and now again in the iiNet case, the prosecutors simply show how the companies arbitrarily police their network as it suits their purpose. For example, TPB would take down warez if users complained about viruses. Now we hear how iiNet established ToS that allowed them to ban users without a court order. It’s like Kazaa claiming they couldn’t control their network and then pushing a forced SW update to all their users.

Going back to the S&W analogy, imagine if S&W refused to sell guns to gang members but happily provided arms to postal workers. Then suppose a clerk shoots up a post office. S&W gets hauled into court and tries to claim they can’t control what customers do with their guns. No. Sorry. S&W lost the right to make that claim when they demonstrated they COULD and DID exercise judgment but chose not to in some cases.

Likewise, TPB and iiNet want to claim “safe harbor” as “common carriers” that are not responsible for the actions of their users. At the same time TPB and iiNet actually do police their users except when it would benefit the RIAA/MPAA.

These companies tie their own noose if they do any policing at all and still try to claim “safe harbor”. This is why iiNet will lose this case.

Fucking hypocrites, they have completely ignored all the technical relevancy of the BT protocol in their case (and that of the pirate bays)

Does car’s companies will also be responsible for every infraction you made when driving too fast using their “technology”.

Does any corp selling bottle of water will be taken to court because some of their customers aren’t recycling?

You got tha picture? Where tha heck are we going with all that junk…

Jess
Privacy-Stuff.be.tc

Smith & Wesson actually. And yeah, the anti-gun activists are always trying to blame the manufacturers and gun shops for people using guns to commit crimes.
Do you know what happens when you point a finger at somebody? You have 3 fingers pointing right back at you.

Cars should be illegal as they can be used to murder people and distribute illict goods.

Clothes should be illegal because they aid shoplifters.

Money should be illegal because it is used to fund crimes.

We could carry on with this bulls**t forever.

Actually no. Even though there are many valid reasons to use taxis, there are many cases where people use them to perform criminal acts and therefore all taxi-riding should be illegal, and car companies should be held responsible as well for building the taxis.

How is this now about Bit-torrent and the Bit-torrent protocol?

I torrent Linux and the like. It isn’t illegal.

Why should they need to know about Bit-torrent? Do they know about the inner workings of FTP and HTTP? All can be used for the same thing.

Looks like Bannon is grasping at straws.

If iiNet disconnected people on accusation alone, it would set a dangerous precedent.

If iiNet did this it would generate bad PR (for disconnecting without sufficient evidence) which in turn would cause undue losses for iiNet.

iiNet cannot be sure the owner of a connection is the infringer and to be fair, should allow customers to appeal disconnection threats.

iiNet has the right to disconnect users, yes… and Bannon has the right to stab himself in the throat with a rusty screwdriver… just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean it is wise or necessary.

“Although iiNet has asserted time and again in the case, that if a court ruled that someone had infringed copyright the ISP would disconnect them”

If a court deems the evidence acceptable, then action is taken and that is completely reasonable.

AFACT just wish to skip this process and get results purely upon accusation.

F**k AFACT and f**k Bannon… these a-holes believe in guilty until proven innocent… and that in itself is not justice.

Until they all get shoot.

Seriously the moving picture industry has been funded by ornisied crime and mobs for years.

Seems they have final had their comeuppance and getting their just deserves.

Face the truth your businesses is OVER get it. People trends move on. better distrubutions models have arision which don’t cost the earth.

The real treason all this bullshit is going has nothing to do with piracy. hell it never was thanks to failing price of digital technology ANYBODY can become a film producer. what’s more can distribute for little or no cost.

These fuckers aren’t fight piracy there just trying to restate their buissness.

The fact is bit-torrent may loose them a few viewers who might buy their films, but what it dose even better is end their monopoly of distribution.

Their just scared mothers and good ridans to them to.

I hope all their lies are exposed and brought to justice for them.

sharing is caring.

afct flact mpaa riaa ifpi bpi are nothing more then fat greedy bustards, king john’s, Robert Mugabe, Adolf Hitler.

sort these fucktards whiles you still have a chance.

Having read the transcripts that are available on this case and what reporting that has been done on this; it bears striking similarities to the TPB show trial. Guess I’ll have to see what the judge’s ruling on this is.

Okay then.

As far as I can see, AFACT is desperate. They know iiNet has given enough information to win the case. However it is true that iiNet should have sent specialists in BT to speak. That would have turned AFACT fail in this case a massive one. lol.

Only those 2 where there because they are representatives.. its bad enough these criminals can waste there time in court as it is.

Theres nothing they really need to know about bittorrent, expecialy the client.. there trying to act like thats the real problem here.

The problem is that the industry is a bunch of lazy as hell thieves and want everybody to do there work for them.

I guess libraries should be held accountable here too.

Don’t forget the car manufacturer. If the robbers drove away in a Ford Taurus that makes Ford guilty of robbery, too, damnit!

Gotta love MAFIAA logic.

iiNet doesn’t sell guns, if one was to compare an ISP to a weapons manufacturer, ISP’s would be selling ammunition on a flat rate.
Say someone who’s subscribed to a monthly ammunition service shoots 15 kids, should the company supplying the shooter be held liable? I don’t think so. But they might if they do not cancel their contract with the shooter –granted the shooter would have to be guilty and convicted. Well actually he wouldn’t, as long as their consumer is a murder suspect; I’d think it would be a pretty bad idea to send him any more ammo. Which is why your analogy doesn’t work (at all), piracy=/=murder.

Digital piracy isn’t even stealing.
I hope most of us can see that disconnecting a household from the internet, solely based on a hunch, isn’t proportional with the risk involved with waiting for an investigation.

What do you think would happen if someone robbed a store and drove away? By the entertainment industry’s logic, the store owner could then sue the city, state, federal gov’t, AND the local police force – hey the thieves used *their* roads to make their getaway. The city/state/gov’t should have KNOWN that that was happening and done something to prevent it. And the police were obviously not doing their “due diligence” by effectively patrolling those streets.

Makes sense, doesn’t it?

WHY can’t someone bring COMMON SENSE things like this up in the trials???!!!

well.. yeh.

Also be sure to run a credit check on them & ask outside sources about them & also bring in the supervisor who hasn’t worked an honest day of his/her life & get em to check out the potential customer. If you are allowed by your credit to proceed but have a rocky credit (but good enough credit anyway), you will not be able to go forward.

Perhaps making the whole system so slow & inefficient as the airports since the new world order or castrated the 911 & all the bs since then.

I say no thanks, allow for free and open for all or fk off… Tak way me net & I will get me new net… Restrict me net & I will open me net. If me wanted censorship me would just disconnect my net & not use it on me own.

The cartel is pusies & needs to have someone fk em wit a brokn botl up der azz. Dey av fked 2ny ppl & dezrv 2 b fked bad.

How bout defending ur tv be4 its too late? Don’t Let the MPAA Kill Your Set-Top Box

The MPAA’s action 2 control your cable set-top box is heating up again. Public Knowledge leading the good fight against the MPAA’s “selectable output control” scheming, & have an action alert up now. Protect interoperability, consumer choice,& innovation from MPAA,@ Public Knowledge &take action now! http://pie.im/1f42

Barrister can go to hell along with the other mafaa supporters.

iiNet customers are responsible for what they do. AFACT will have to seek for a trial for each one of them. They can’t ask iiNet to watch the connections of millions of customers for them. iiNet is not the police.