Piracy Case Dropped in Australia after 2-Year BattleAdded: Friday, February 12th, 2016
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, www.extratorrent.cc, 2016
A landmark case against the Australians accused of illegally downloading the movie Dallas Buyers Club was finally dropped by the plaintiff. The moviemaker said it had decided not to appeal against the December court ruling, which rejected a proposal for contact between the movie producers and alleged downloaders.
The case was filed back in October 2014 against the Internet service provider iiNet. The ISP initially refused to hand over the personal details of its subscribers accused of illegally sharing Dallas Buyers Club through BitTorrent protocol.
The movie studio accused nearly 5,000 iiNet customers of sharing the movie, and in April 2015 the Internet service provider lost in a federal court, which nearly forced it to accede and part with the data. However, in December 2015, another judge dismissed the ruling, calling the earlier proposals entirely unrealistic and so surreal as to not be taken seriously.
Overall, the legal battle over the identities of the suspected file-sharers was considered as an attempt to prevent the company representing the movie’s producers Voltage Pictures from engaging in “speculative invoicing”. The latter is widely used all over the world and involves sending alleged pirates messages demanding a settlement under threat of legal action. This is why the April proposals to disclose the details of 4,700+ alleged downloaders came with a set of conditions. For example, there was a requirement that any proposed contact between the movie studio and the users had to be approved by the court. In August, the moviemakers wanted a permission to send a letter and phone call to the alleged infringers asking for personal data, including their salaries. It also proposed to seek damages for the cost of a single, legitimate download of the movie, as well as the cost of obtaining the customer’s details, the number of people accessing the uploaded file, and how many other movies had been downloaded through torrent networks.
Unsurprisingly enough, such proposals were rejected. Then, in December, another proposal that limited damages to just a single penalty was also rejected. The movie studio was given a few weeks to appeal, but decided not to escalate the case. It complained that the latest court ruling was certainly a disappointing outcome for the company.
Friday, February 12th, 2016
it's great to see money hungry copyrighters hit with their own big stick ! gotta love that !
greed is the basis of their attempts to make more money than they're entitled to get legitamely...thanks to the aussie judge
who was able to see through that and the aussie laws requiring those greedy bastards to apply seperately for each person and each breach to the federal court....not so bloody funny now mate lol !
as any aussie pirate would say ....." up yours mate " and loving it !
ha ha ha
|posted by (2016-02-13 10:03:45)|
|HOORAY ... a LEGAL PRECEDENT has been set. That will make a HELL-OF-A-LOT harder for other studios to even attempt that here from now on!|
|@Crash1 - A legal precedent has not been set as the courts did not make any rulings. The DBC did not proceed with the case. There is nothing stopping them raising the same or amended case again in the future.|
|posted by (2016-02-14 14:54:47)|
|@discodean ... I suggest you re-read the article, especially the last 2 sentences ... Quote "The moviemaker said it had decided not to appeal against the December court ruling" ... Quote "The movie studio was given a few weeks to appeal, but decided not to escalate the case. It complained that the latest court ruling was certainly a disappointing outcome for the company."|
|It may set some precedent in the affected Country.|
Unfortunately it did not occur where BREIN operates.
Most Popular Stories