Comments on: Day Three: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal

By: Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal @ blog.idtorrent.org

Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal @ blog.idtorrent.org — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:00:43 +0000

[...] a continuation from our earlier report, yesterday two of the appeal judges questioned Justice Cowdroy’s reasoning in the original [...]

By: Day Three: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal | TorrentFreak | Unblocked News

Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:36:52 +0000

[...] anti- piracy group could simply submit new notices with new terms and … Follow this link: Day Three: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal | TorrentFreak afact, anti, isp, new-notices, reasonable-steps, [...]

By: Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal | We R Pirates

Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal | We R Pirates — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:20:20 +0000

[...] a continuation from our earlier report, yesterday two of the appeal judges questioned Justice Cowdroy’s reasoning in the original [...]

By: P2PTalk » Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal

P2PTalk » Day Four: AFACT v iiNet BitTorrent Piracy Appeal — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:02:33 +0000

[...] a continuation from our earlier report, yesterday two of the appeal judges questioned Justice Cowdroy’s reasoning in the original [...]

By: neofucker

neofucker — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 03:05:49 +0000

He didn’t use the “steal” word today

By: jovialau

jovialau — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 03:03:51 +0000

If I lend my lawnmower to my neighbour to mow his lawn…Am I infringeing on the patent rights of the lawnmower manufacturer?Or for that matter,my car/wheelbarrow/or anything which I have purchased to which someone might claim a proportion of ownership.If I legitimately purchase a music cd or movie.Can I not pass them over the fence to my neighbour for his enjoyment?If I purchase same for a birthday present,Am I illegitimately transferring ownership?I mean.WTF!!!!!!!!!!!

By: Whatever

Whatever — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:29:11 +0000

@”Cobden said that AFACT never asked for a graduated response”

That’s a dangerous route he is taking here which might end in graduated response which i assume isn’t the goal of iiNet.

@15 neocon
Why are YOU as the MAFIAA slave/troll just sitting back, typing useless (ineffective) comments, while letting everybody continue infringing and dont play a(n) (effective) role in it ?

(I am sure he won’t answer that)

By: steve mcqueen

steve mcqueen — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:00:34 +0000

you guys are missing the main thing, AFACT doesnt care. they are right. everyone else is wrong. you do as they say. they have “evidence” thats it. they say stop it, you are supposed to.

theyll take it to court as they have, and if they lose, theyll take it to another court. the isp can win whatever cases it wants, AFACT will keep arguing and trying to get its way.

this is the way of the business world. AFACT is like apple. you do what they say when they say how they say it, and thats it. theres no other way things are gonna be. and if you dont theyre gonna be jerks about it.

“oh its legal to jailbreak your iProduct”. well bite me. warranty voided, and we got your cash anyway. AFACT is the same. “oh you downloaded a movie and though we cant prove you did, we have ‘proof’”. bite me. ill take you to court.

By: Ad

Ad — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:08:38 +0000

AFACT aren’t the police, much as they’d like to be. They should have no more business dictating how another company acts than I would. If Iinet’s users are downloading copyrighted materials (which few dispute) then they should either take legal redress via the courts &/or the police, or STFU and GTFO.

By: horsemeat

horsemeat — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 21:21:39 +0000

The ISP should not be responsible for the subscribers end of.

The internet is used for downloading legitimate things also, and going after pensioners who’ve had their WIFI hijacked for downloading gay porn is probably not on their priority list.