Tweet
Just a summary of what went on this week:
* Warner, Paramount executives testified that they expect their anti-piracy investigators to work within the law.
* Investigators downloaded pirated content from iiNet users on BitTorrent to prove that iiNet "made" these content available
* iiNet contends that these investigators were licensed and authorised to download the illegal content by the studios that employed them, and so no copyright laws have been broken by anyone other than iiNet customers.
* AFACT forced to admit that their evidence is not 100% reliable. This relates to the monitoring of IP addresses, which are dynamic for iiNet customers, and so, it makes it difficult to track who actually made the downloads or uploads if the AFACT does not have access to non public records that iiNet has.
* The dynamic IP address also means that a single user may be counted as multiple users if they log out and log in again, resulting in a new IP address being given to these users. This comes after claims that they also counted as two infringements if the same user with the same IP address was still downloading the same file from morning to afternoon.
More:
* Warner, Paramount executives testified that they expect their anti-piracy investigators to work within the law.
* Investigators downloaded pirated content from iiNet users on BitTorrent to prove that iiNet "made" these content available
* iiNet contends that these investigators were licensed and authorised to download the illegal content by the studios that employed them, and so no copyright laws have been broken by anyone other than iiNet customers.
* AFACT forced to admit that their evidence is not 100% reliable. This relates to the monitoring of IP addresses, which are dynamic for iiNet customers, and so, it makes it difficult to track who actually made the downloads or uploads if the AFACT does not have access to non public records that iiNet has.
* The dynamic IP address also means that a single user may be counted as multiple users if they log out and log in again, resulting in a new IP address being given to these users. This comes after claims that they also counted as two infringements if the same user with the same IP address was still downloading the same file from morning to afternoon.
More:
