Comments on: iiNet v AFACT Anti-Piracy Case Appeal Set For August 2010

By: anti-gun

anti-gun — Tue, 18 May 2010 08:27:57 +0000

isn’t it amazing – if MPAA holds the seller of bandwidth responsible for the use of its bandwidth, then NRA should hold responsible the use of the guns that people buy… and criminally prosecute ARMS DEALERS each time someone is shot – columbine, etc.

By: Borderline Voter

Borderline Voter — Tue, 18 May 2010 08:12:53 +0000

“Neither the original case nor this latest appeal will stop piracy — even if in the unlikely event they won the appeal,” AFACT concludes.

So why spend the time and money for an outcome which will do nothing.

By: Si

Si — Tue, 18 May 2010 07:26:14 +0000

@26 iiNet is the 3rd largest ISP in Australia…wouldn’t exactly call that small

Will be good to see iiNet’s appeal :D thanks for the info 13

By: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx — Mon, 17 May 2010 19:01:13 +0000

I was so impressed with iiNet’s stand on this issue that I changed from Optus to iiNet when I moved house. AFACT deliberately targeted one of the smaller ISPs, hoping to set a legal precedent that could be used against the more powerful ones later. Thank goodness they failed.

By: Whatever

Whatever — Mon, 17 May 2010 08:01:20 +0000

@“unworkable environment for content creators and content providers” and represented “a serious threat to Australia’s digital economy.”

Since the trolls always scream about LAW, where is the law argument here ? This is really an American argument where laws are put aside to go to war or screw other countries in other ways.

Both arguments are the MAFIAA’s problem and no reason for a judge to change the verdict in their favor. I don’t know Australian law but i assume there is no part mentioning “if there is an unworkable enviroment for content providers or the Australian digital economy is in danger then Mickey Mouse wins any needed courtcase”

Could be funny in court when the MAFIAA starts explaining that the Australian digital economy is in danger by not sending money to mostly US companies. Then the defense merely has to point out that ISP’s, PC sellers and IT personel which are part of the ‘digital economy’ don’t appear to be an endangered species by the use of bittorrent.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 16 May 2010 22:20:47 +0000

Law or no law, piracy is not going away.

By: Fazer*27

Fazer*27 — Sun, 16 May 2010 05:57:02 +0000

im Sayin, as per like all you are sayign Now, that just as per as Jon Lemon of Beetles, and cinnaman chalenges and such as that stuff. And further researches, just as like all You Are sayin. Plus if you are your usin good gramer and like that, it helps you now?

By: Trelew

Trelew — Sat, 15 May 2010 17:47:37 +0000

If the corporations loose the suit they probably will buy out iiNet and change the user agreement and screw over everyone anyways. That seems to be general consensus now, buy out the ISP, change the user agreements, and that way they can screw all internet users without having to worry about what is right. Regardless how many times we show the corporations they are in the wrong, they will just ignore it because they don’t care about the truth and what’s right; all they care about is furthering their greed and power.

By: TerribleTony

TerribleTony — Sat, 15 May 2010 13:28:55 +0000

I wonder if iiNet are seeing an increase in subscriber numbers…

By: anon2

anon2 — Sat, 15 May 2010 09:53:36 +0000

wish iiNet all the good luck going. although they have won once already, they better be prepared for more than just this appeal by AFACT. if the case goes iiNet’s way (hopefully) again, there will be another appeal and another and another until eventually AFACT gets what it wants. seen too much of this elsewhere to believe they will stop. they just need to find out who to give how much to. once they know that, then they will get the ‘epic win’ and out will come the comments of ‘how justice came to its senses’.