AFACT v iiNet: iiNet moves to reassure customers
- 06 November, 2009 09:35
- Comments 2
iiNet has moved to reassure customers that it never supported breaches of the Copyright Act, following the chief executive’s three and a half day stint in the witness box.
In a statement on its website, the internet service provider (ISP) provided an account of day 14 of court proceedings against the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) in the Federal Court of Australia.
The company said CEO Michael Malone was pleased to have completed his evidence and defend allegations that iiNet encouraged unauthorised downloading of films.
The statement reads: He [Malone] said he remained confident of iiNet's defence and position and in the case. He said iiNet has never in any way supported or encouraged breaches of the law, including infringement of the Copyright Act. Michael also said iiNet does not and never has authorised illegal sharing or downloading of files in breach of copyright laws. He said, on the contrary, he was pleased to be able to spell out how iiNet's Freezone encouraged customers to freely access licensed legal copyright content.
The ISP said it “…would cooperate with copyright holders and law enforcement agencies if the appropriate court orders, warrants or legal processes were followed.”
However, it reiterated that it had no obligation to disconnect its customers, if AFACT or another third party had made an allegation of copyright infringement.
The case resumes this morning, with iiNet’s second witness, chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby, to continue cross-examination.
Sign up for Computerworld's newsletters to stay up to date.
Got more on this story?Email Computerworld or follow @computerworldau on Twitter and let us know.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
- HP and Closed Circuit Print Security Podcast featuring Quorcirca
- Advanced Malware Exposed - How advanced malware, zero-day and targeted APT attacks are evading today's network defences
- Customer Case Study: Yarra Valley Water Turns to Enterprise Software to Improve Information Flow
- Transforming Software Delivery: An IBM Rational Case Study
- IDC Whitepaper: Generating Proven Business Value with EMC Next-Generation Backup and Recovery
-
Coalition NBN better or worse?
-
Coalition NBN better or worse?
-
CeBIT 2012: Will NBN speed up freight delivery times?
-
NBN build gaining momentum daily: Quigley
-
Coalition NBN better or worse?
-
Microsoft Outlook 2000 Bible
-
Storage Area Networks for Dummies®, 2nd Edition
-
Introduction to Information Systems
-
Excel Advanced Report Development W W/S
-
Machine Learning and Data Mining
-
Univ of Illinois Excel VBA Programming for Dummies
-
PowerPoint 97 for Windows for Dummies Quick Reference
-
Iphone for Dummies, Target One Spot Edition
-
Networking Foundations
Comments
Roger
I would be concerned however, that iiNet publicly stated they had a 'written' policy for repeat infringements. It has become clear they lied to the public via both press release and on whirlpool forums about their actual position. MM admitted under oath they never had a written policy, or indeed an actual policy. Talk about misleading the public, their customers, and their shareholders.....
Anonymous
@Roger, an interesting comment because it may say much more about Roger than it does about iiNet. It refers to "the public, their customers, and the shareholders", but is strangely silent about the content corporations whose mouthpiece organisation started the court case.
Post new comment