AFACT v iiNet: Day 9 – AFACT Attacks iiNet Piracy Policy
Written by enigmax on November 02, 2009Day nine of the trial between anti-piracy group AFACT and Aussie ISP iiNet. Today iiNet CEO Michael Malone was extensively cross-examined by AFACT’s senior counsel over his company’s piracy policy and moves he took to change that of Westnet, the ISP iiNet acquired in 2008.
It’s day nine in the copyright infringement case of AFACT – representing several Hollywood studios – and Aussie ISP iiNet (earlier coverage of day one, day two, day three, day four , day five, day six, day seven, day eight.
Today, iiNet CEO Michael Malone was questioned at length over dealings he had with Westnet, another ISP which was acquired by his company for AUS $81 million in May 2008.
Westnet had developed an automated system to pass on infringement notices from copyright holders to its customers, a process which Malone earlier described as “making more work for no benefit,” and was said to be scathing in defense of due process and consumer rights.
“Taking the opposing argument, a random third party is lodging an unsubstantiated accusation against a customer and you’re passing it on?” wrote Malone in an email to Westnet, continuing, “Your current approach is doing damage to the industry and iiNet’s position on this matter.”
According to itNews, today Malone admitted he had “hit the roof” when he had discovered Westnet’s policy on infringement notices.
When any company acquires another there is often a need to standardize procedures and policies, and with iiNet and Westnet the position was no different. Malone said that whenever he found differences in policies between the two companies he took steps to bring those of Westnet into line with those at iiNet. He also stated that he was unaware that Westnet had failed to follow his instructions and adopt iiNet group policy following the acquisition.
One of the reasons he sought to change the Westnet policy, he said, was to bring the company into line with the position held by the Internet Industry Association on the issue.
Cross-examining Malone on iiNet’s role in providing a broadband service which enabled users to share movies using BitTorrent, senior counsel Tony Bannon for the movie industry referred to infringement notices sent to iiNet for the Sony movie, Pineapple Express.
According to CW, Malone responded that as a mere service provider, iiNet had no way of knowing if any of its customers were engaged in copyright infringement, but could confirm that the individual who allegedly committed the breaches was still an iiNet customer.
The company was not aware, however, if the customer continued to breach copyright.
The case continues tomorrow.
Previously: 10 Temporary New Homes For Those Missing Demonoid
Next: Top 10 Most Pirated Movies on BitTorrent
31 Responses
saw a thing on 60 minutes last night they was talking about piracy. how the movie studioes are looseing money all over the place.
Is it day 8 or 9? :<
enigmax: thanks widget. my mistake, corrected
“saw a thing on 60 minutes last night they was talking about piracy. how the movie studioes are looseing money all over the place.”
By their past, present, and ongoing actions, it’s well deserved… and always brings a smile to my face:)
@1 Ya I saw a little of that too. Their facts are a little screwed with out an opposition to tell them that they are wrong.
But that Bittorrent Model they used was pretty cool. Be that was the only thing that looked to be only fact.
I watched that on 60 minutes Jane Pauley called the Bit Torrent some new hi tech wiz bang technology (Had no clue what he was talking about) and then showed the 3d crappy vuse thingy. She had no clue of what it meant. Lmao my ass off…Everyone who is a dumbass about bittorrent should watch “Steal this film” and Gottfrid will tell ya… 8-)
@5 laughing my ass off… my ass off?
lol @6
glad hollywood is losing money.hope they lose even more aftera ll the years we have had to put up with their greed.
they should cap the rich ego stars income as well.
@6 Laughing (my ass off)^2
i hate hollywood
everyone know bollywood is the place to be
@Irish pIRAte,
exactly, anyone can act like a gangster (Scarface) and put on a ‘performance’, anyone can also make a couple of boxing movies (Rocky) but… I ask you this… how many can use a tree(Nearly every bollywoody movie) as a dancing prop???!?
:))
Michael Malone i <3 you!
I would so switch to iinet, if only they offered a shit load more quota like netspace who im currently with.. regardless, this is the kind of ISP you would want to be with!
The ones that fight for their customers and dont give in to bullshit intimidation tactics by the money hungry corporate dogs who live off peoples hard earned cash like leeches, and when u try and pry them off after them leeching off ur ass so for long its virtually impossible… now just sit back and watch them burn, not long now :) till they peel right off and shrivel and die…
Fcuken luv ya fellas.
I don’t get it. How can the movie-industry loose money at the same time they are showing record numbers? *confused*
movie studios are NOT losing money, they’re just not making as much as they’d like.
It’s not like they started out with $10M, and due to sharing they’re now at $8M.
That “60 Minutes” story as video you can see here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5486510n
Enjoy!
They are making MORE money than ever before, there’s an article on http://www.slashdot.org, which debunks these lies.
I would never waste my time on a cam rip anyway, wait for the screeners to be leaked, thats there own dumb fault
The 60 Minutes spot is nothing more that propaganda for Big Business. It sadly shows how journalist integrity has been bought and sold.
To connect downloading to organized crime is so insanely stupid but since the majority of population want to be spoon-fed and not question what’s being told them; Big Business gets away with this sh!t.
Hollyweird is not losing money, never has! They just want the various governments, who they bribe and control, to change the internet is used so that they can control it for their own means. Basically kill the internet.
@18 “To connect downloading to organized crime is so insanely stupid”
Not entirely – you just need to look at it from the right perspective. Downloading of copyrighted material DOES have a connection to ‘organised crime’. The connection, of course, is that it’s the ‘owners’ of said ‘copyright’ who are the organised criminals!!! ;)
iiinet, its more like skynet
hwua hua ua hua hua hua huahua
ii
net,
its more.
like sky
net.
MWaa hua hua haahau ahauhau ahuaahuua
eehhhnet, mez sno lak skeh nhet
mawh awh awh awh awh awha wh aw hawha
Mphhhh, i got a secret,,,,,,,
tee hee hee hee hee!
iinet, its more like skynet!
ROFLMGDAOLAMFNIGLETS
I’m Mike Wallace, I’m Morley Safer, and I’m Ed Bradley
And we know as much about technology as Andy Rooney knows about hip hop
A broken record here. First Hollywood is buying and bribing Legislators, Then judges are bought and bribed, now journos are bought and sold. You are starting to sound like a vinyl record where the needles got stuck. .
I’m sure most lone pirates subconciously manage to convince themselves they are only “sharing infomation” and stiking it to “the Man.” You just want something for nohing and only idiots pay for films. But look at all these headlines..£142,000 CONFISCATED FROM CONVICTED COUNTERFEITER trading in a variety of counterfeit luxury consumer goods and manufacturing illegal copies of music film, games and computer software which he sold mainly via his own website and the internet
EIGHTEEN YEARS FOR PIRACY CRIME BUSINESS RINGLEADERS
Total seizures:
180 burning trays
40k burnt DVD-Rs
I suppose Hollywood paid bribes for FACT to post these stories on
http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/
The reporter was a brown noser and acting somewhat stupidly but you can’t deny eventually, any sort of decent films like the Matrix will not get made, indeed most people say on here how much shit is turned out by Hollywood these days. Yep they only gor for safe “Blockbuster shit like Terminator”
Yes the likes of Hugh Jackman, Heath Ledger(RIP) get paid way too much, but what about the ordinary workers, make-up artists, sound techs, vid engineers etc ?
It’s not a victimless crime. They are not wanting to control the internet, just control criminal activity. By stopping drink/driving you are not trying to control people from driving, just stopping crime.
Eventally one person will pay about $5m to buy a file , everyone else will just dload for nothing “cause it’s our right!”
No I’m not paid off bribed etc etc, wish I was -have you seen those Adsense Adverts get pid for posting links – guess what they are a scam.
Hi.
With anonymous protocol is best?
Maybe you guys from TF could make an informative site about secure p2p.
We will prevail.
Hollywood deserve to lose money after years of mediocre films. If they release a good movie people will come and watch. E.G Batman Return and the upcoming James Cameron Avatar. I just wish they’d stop crying wolf and blame piracy for their low returns.
@25
guess what. thats commericial piracy that is actually illegal… hollywood is not inovating anymore they just make crap remakes of everything and that is why they are losing money.
1 person distributing 1million copies for sale Commercial scum bag making money off Piracy
1million people dloading 1 copy. Potential lost sales 1 million.
i million self deluding pirates – that have th right to commercial stuff for free.
Guess what no diffrenece. People wanting something for nothing with no effort
auggh. Wordpress hates me lol :P
Oh, come on. What a load of BS.
Automated systems are flawed anyway you look at it, theyll see all traffic as the same, whether its youtube, or BitTorrent. =S
Go iiNet I think AFACT are just blantly pointing their fingers now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r7jLvlTBto
Who knows iiNet has the luck of the Irish behind ‘em ;)
no more youtube then
18 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.