[AusNOG] iiNet update

[Darren Moss]

I think the judge is generalising, by saying that it was not purely via
the use of "internet" services provided by iiNet that caused copyright
infringement.
Instead, he is most likely suggesting BitTorrent is the "tool" being
used to assist with the act of copyright infringement.
 
But at the end of the day, the "user" is the offending component in all
this.
 
Thank goodness the court did not uphold the claim against iiNet. It
could have led to all sorts of stupid claims by industries and providers
who want to make a dollar out of people - the very people who most
likely pay for and take their family/friends to use the service offered
in the first place (ie: Cinema, Foxtel, SkyHome).
 
The movie industry needs to protect their own industry through their own
means - ie: finding ways to protect their product or new ways to
distribute their product, just the same way as other industries have
done. For example - streaming internet radio stations pay a royalty to
broadcast music and copyright content.
 
There's no point in litigating against (screwing) the service provider,
because even if they (AFACT) won, what could service providers do to
ensure they would not also be affected by the same claims both now and
into the future.
 
What was all this over again ??? Oh yeah, entertainment. If the clever
lawyers at AFACT engaged with the internet industry to legally
distribute their content, I'm sure the majority of public internet users
would be open to some form of user pays system.
 
Cheers.
 

Regards, 
 
 
Darren Moss
General Manager
Australia and New Zealand
[p] 1300 131 083 [f] 03 9017 2287
[e] Darren.Moss at em3.com.au [w] www.em3.com.au <http://www.em3.com.au/> 

em3 People and Technology | Managed Technology Experts
postal: PO Box 2333, Moorabbin VIC 3189

New Zealand Airedale Street, Auckland City
postal: PO Box 39573, Howick 2045
[p] 09 887 0550 [f] 09 887 0273



________________________________

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Nicholas Meredith
Sent: 2010-02-04 3:58 pm
To: Bevan Slattery
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] iiNet update


On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Bevan Slattery
<Bevan.Slattery at staff.pipenetworks.com> wrote:


	"copyright occured as result of use of BitTorrent, not the
Internet"
	said Justice Cowdroy
	
	_______________________________________________
	


I couldn't be happier for the sane ruling on this case, but this begs
the question, does this Judge have ANY idea at all what the Internet is?
I'm referring to the context of a home user who sees the World Wide Web
as the 'Internet' and E-Mail and everything else as just E-Mail etc. The
statement above shows a lack of comprehension that all services are 'the
Internet.'

Or are they breaking it down into OSI Layer2/3, where the Internet is
defined as IP connectivity, and not the application protocols that
reside above?

- Nicholas Meredith


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100204/a5745f8a/attachment.html>