<p dir="ltr">There are safe harbour provisions in Australia but they indemnify ISPs from customer criminal behavior e.g. emails arranging a bank robbery, in the same way the post office is indemnified from letters doing the same thing. Piracy is not criminal here and the application of safe harbours to it isn't relevant.</p>

<p dir="ltr">G</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 12/06/2014 9:13 AM, "Paul Brooks" <<a href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au">pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

  
    
  
  <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div>On 11/06/2014 1:09 PM, Damian Guppy
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Isnt that in the safe harbor provisions of the
        telco act?</div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    What 'Safe Harbour' provisions in the Telco Act? Safe Harbour (and
    'Common Carrier') are concepts in US legislation, not Australian
    legislation.<br>
    <br>
    IANAL - but you should consult a real one if you think there is some
    sort of blanket 'CSP not responsible for actions of customers' in
    Australian legislation, so you can keep the reference handy.<br>
    <br>
    P.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>--Damian</div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Paul
          Brooks <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au" target="_blank">pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au</a>></span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div>
              <div>On 11/06/2014 11:43 AM, Mike Ryan - Brass
                Razoo Group wrote:<br>
                ><br>
                > By opposing legislation that outlaws criminal
                activity (intellectual property theft)<br>
                > are iiNet giving a tacit nod to illegal activities?
                ISP's and carriers are not<br>
                > liable for the behaviour of their clients. iiNet
                should stick to providing<br>
                > shareholder value and ensuring system availability.<br>
                > It's called "Rule of Law".<br>
              </div>
            </div>
            Please indicate where in Australian law this 'ISP's and
            carriers are not liable for<br>
            the behaviour of their clients' is described.<br>
            Particularly regarding ISPs.<br>
            <span><font color="#888888"><br>
                P.<br>
              </font></span>
            <div>
              <div>_______________________________________________<br>
                AusNOG mailing list<br>
                <a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
                <a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre>_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div>

<br>_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>