Appeal dismissed: Roadshow Films Pty Limited v iiNet Limited  FCAFC 23 SMH report However, Jagot J dissented and Emmett J warned: Even though the Copyright Owners are not entitled to the relief claimed in this proceeding, it does not follow that that is an end of the matter. It is clear that the questions raised in the proceeding are ongoing. It does not necessarily follow that there would never.. Read More
In case you have been on Mars, or locked in a conference room writing submissions, you have probably heard that the Federal Court has rejected the music industry’s attempt to impose liability on iiNet, and ISP, for copyright infringement by authorising the infringing activities of users of its network. Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Limited (No. 3)  FCA 24 (636 para judgment) here. Since I will find myself.. Read More
DesignTechnica operates bulletin boards. The plaintiff alleged that some postings on the bulletin boards defamed it. In addition to suing DesignTechnica, the plaintiff sued Google for libel by reproducing snippets of the (allegedly) defamatory material in search results. Eady J, sitting in the Queen’s Bench Division, dismissed the plaintiff’s claims against Google on the grounds that Google did not publish the material. The case obviously turns on the requirements for.. Read More
ASCAP is suing AT&T in the USA for copyright infringements when an AT&T subscriber’s phone plays a ringtone. ASCAP is a collecting society for public performance and broadcast rights. It alleges that when the subscriber receives a phone call in, say, a restaurant and the phone plays a ringtone it is a performance in public that needs a licence. Fred Lohman from the EFF says this claim is doomed in.. Read More
Some headlines are reporting that L’Oreal lost its trade mark infringement action in the UK against eBay. For example: here, here and here. The basic facts were that L’Oreal was suing eBay for trade mark infringement as a result of hosting auctions in which vendors were alleged to be selling counterfeit L’Oreal products. It seems that most of the vendors turned out to be selling parallel imports – imported from.. Read More
Some points worth pondering arising from the recent pleadings fight Both the movie studios and iiNet brought motions for summary judgment and/or to strike parts of the other side’s pleadings relating to the claims that (1) iiNet authorised infringement, (2) iiNet was liable as a primary infringer for actually reproducing the allegedly copied films and (3) whether or not iiNet was also liable in conversion. The movie companies are obviously.. Read More
IPKat reports that the case in Eire in which the record companies sued the ISP, Eirecom, has settled after 8 days of the scheduled 4 weeks of trial. Amongst other details, the ISP adopted a 3 strikes policy and the record companies deployed a service to monitor (entrap?) file”sharers”. Read more here. Some other background and 3 other strikes here, here, here and here.
IPRIA is hosting a free seminar on ISPs liability for authorising copyright infringement. Impressive range of panellists. Possibly the only hotter topic in copyright is what is a reproduction of a substantial part. Score a CPD point! 5 February 2009 at 5.30 for 6.00pm. Details via here.
The big movie studios have brought proceedings against iiNet, one of the larger (in a non-Bigpond sort of way) ISPs seeking to impose liability on the ISP for infringing downloading by its subscribers. The Application is here (pdf) and the Statement of Claim is here (pdf). Various analyses: Nic Suzor has a detailed view here Kim Weatherall here Australian PC Mag here The Film Industry outlines its position here IPRoo carries a.. Read More