iiNet lawsuit - no coincidence?
Yesterday brought news that a long list of copyright holders, under the banner of the 'Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft' (AFACT) have sued iiNet for copyright infringement - their argument seems to be that iiNet have failed to take reasonable steps to prevent their users from downloading movies online. In one sense, the claim against iiNet is that they have 'failed to do their utmost' (see also John Byng) to prevent piracy, which fits rather neatly given that the motivation of the copyright holders is undoubtedly pour encourager les autres.
But something about the situation smells. Not just that AFACT have chosen to take on iiNet instead of larger ISPs such as Telstra Bigpond, who would be better able to defend the action - although this choice has been characterized as 'gutless' by others.
In particular, what smells is this:
- October 29: Kevin Bermeister (sued for squillions by the global music industry in the Kazaa litigation) and Michael Speck (former head of Music Industry Piracy Investigations, who were heading the lawsuit against Kazaa) announce that they are flogging a magical new filtering technology allegedly capable of removing both porn and piracy from peer-to-peer networks;
- November 11: iiNet announce that they will participate in a trial of Internet filtering technology; and
- November 20: iiNet sued by the copyright holders.
This has certain parallels with what has occurred overseas, where at least some companies who are selling anti-piracy prophylactics have connections, financial or otherwise, with the copyright industry. I don't think its entirely kosher for the copyright holders to be threatening to sue ISPs, schools and colleges, etc, unless they introduce anti-piracy measures, and gee whiz, here's one that they're selling!
This is the inevitable result of forcing ISPs to police the content that traverses their network - everybody with an agenda which involves or would be furthered by the blocking of content that they believe unlawful or find objectionable will want their agenda catered to.
You forgot the bit about where Michael Malone (managing director of iiNet) called Stephen Conroy "the worst Communications Minister we’ve had in the 15 years since the industry has existed."
The real problem for the Copyright industry is not that people can copy their protected content, but that quality content is not scarce, and the Internet is proving that artists don't need to pay homage to the gatekeepers of the past anymore. The only growth industry available for the Copyright owners is inserting themselves into the legal process so they can once more "own" the channel and squash the independents.
The real interesting thing will be to see whether Telstra and Optus step in on the side of iiNet (because the precedent will burn them too) or whether a deal has been done somewhere.