Last month, we wrote about the lawsuit filed by various movie studios, against Australian ISP iiNet for failing to wave a magic wand and wipe out piracy
. Apparently, the reason the studios thought they had a slam dunk case was because they hired an "investigator" who signed up with iiNet's service, purposely shared movies
, and then had the studios complain to see if iiNet would cut him off. Since it did not, the studios claim that iiNet knew about piracy and did nothing about it. Leaving aside the point that it wasn't actually copyright infringement in the case of the investigator, since he was authorized to distribute the content, and the takedown notice would likely be a false notification, iiNet's response (which we mentioned when the case first came out) seems to still be dead on:
They send us a list of IP addresses and say 'this IP address was involved in a breach on this date'. We look at that say 'well what do you want us to do with this? We can't release the person's details to you on the basis of an allegation and we can't go and kick the customer off on the basis of an allegation from someone else'. So we say 'you are alleging the person has broken the law; we're passing it to the police. Let them deal with it'.
So, iiNet did
take appropriate action. It alerted the police that a company felt laws were being broken. That seems like it should be the extent of any ISP's engagement when sent such flimsy evidence.