Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Aussie ISP in court over song-swapping

  1. #1


    Aussie ISP in court over song-swapping

    James Pearce
    ZDNet Australia
    October 21, 2003, 15:25 BST

    The Australian music industry is targeting an Internet service provider as part of a court case against file-swappers

    In what is believed to be the first case of its kind in the world, the Australian music industry has listed an Internet service provider (ISP) as a respondent in a court case involving music piracy.

    E-Talk Communications, trading as Comcen Internet Services, found itself in Federal Court in front of Justice Brian Tamberlin in Sydney, charged with making money from the provision of copyright-infringing music files. This is the first time the music industry has accused an ISP of being directly involved in piracy by allowing its infrastructure to be used for file-trading activities, according to Michael Speck, the manager of Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI), who led the industry's investigation.

    However, lawyers representing E-Talk Communications claimed in court today that the music industry, in acting against its subsidiary, Comcen, was pursuing the wrong entity. They argued the industry should be pursuing another entity associated with E-Talk Communications. In response, lawyers for the music industry applicants -- which include Universal Music Australia, EMI Music Australia, Sony Music Entertainment (Australia), Warner Music Australia, BMG Australia and Festival Records -- claimed they had the right entity, and would simply add the other entity to the proceedings.

    The tactic marks an escalation in the simmering battle between the music industry and the ISPs over how much responsibility the latter should take for any copyright infringing behaviour of their subscribers. Around the world the music industry is attempting to force ISPs to hand over the details of specific customers, and the Australian Record Industry Association (ARIA) pulled out of negotiations with the Internet Industry Association (IIA) over differences on this issue.

    "This case proves what the music industry has been saying about the Internet industry for many years, that music piracy is an integral part of the ISP business model," Speck told ZDNet Australia . He added that the evidence uncovered in this case proves that ISPs know how much illegal file sharing is happening on their networks, and they embrace it for the revenue.

    "If things don't change we'll be going after more ISPs," said Speck.

    The charge is the result of an 11-month investigation into the Web site, culminating in raids on Friday and Saturday last week. The registrant of the domain name, Australian Stephen Cooper, was also charged but failed to appear in court today, prompting an adjournment of proceedings until Tuesday, 28 October.

    "In my experience investigating the revenue structure of Web sites such as [] the ISP hosting the Web site, [Com-cen], stands to benefit economically from the increased consumption of bandwidth that would result from an increase in the flow of traffic to the Web site and an increase in the number of sound recordings downloaded by visitors to the Web site due to the large size of music files," said Speck's affadavit.

    "The Web site appears to me to be highly organised," said Speck. "It provides a whole user interface to encourage Internet users to find digital music files and to assist them in the download process."

    Lawyers for the music industry claim the Web site received 7 million unique visitors from around the world during the past 12 months.

    "In my experience investigating Internet piracy and other piracy, this Web site is one of the largest sites of its kind, providing thousands of infringing recordings and continuously providing very recent releases based on top local and international charts for free download, under a highly accessible domain name and using obvious metatags," read the affidavit.

    Speck also noted the Web site had disguised some music files by relabelling them as jpg files, "so as to avoid detection by persons or organisations, such as MIPI, monitoring files stored or shared".

    The maintainers of the Web site appear to be aware of the illegality of their practice, as in the "Frequently Asked Questions" section under the question "Are MP3s Legal?" it reads:

    "MP3s are both legal and illegal. It is legal when the song's copyright holder has granted permission to download and play the song. It's still legal if you encode the MP3 for personal use, however it is illegal to distribute or trade MP3s without permission from the song's copyright holder."

    However, this is incorrect. Under current Australian laws it is illegal to make a back-up copy of legally obtained copyrighted material for personal use without the permission of the copyright holder.

    The site also includes a disclaimer stating: "All audio files can be downloaded for evaluation purposes only and must be deleted after 24 hours! If you like a song, please buy the original. If you don't agree with these rules, the webmaster of, our host and advertisers, are not responsible for anything. When you download a song, you take full responsibility for doing so. None of the files on this site are stored on our servers. We are just providing links to remote files."

    The move comes amongst widespread opposition to the US music industry's campaign to suing individual file-swappers. A week-long boycott of the record industry which started on Monday, the "Stop RIAA Lawsuits Coalition", has seen 122 Web sites join in.
    Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 CPU 2 x Kingston Hyper 2 GB Kit memory 1066MHz MSI P35 Platinum Combo Mobo Razer Barracuda AC-1 Digital Audio Card XFX PCIe 8800GTX xXx Video card Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU Samsung 320GB IDE HD for OS WD 250GB SataII HD 2 x WD 500GB SATAII HD Compro T750 HDTV Dual Tuner PCI Card Thermaltake Bigwater 745 water cooling Samsung 226BW 22" monitor Samsung Syncmaster 913 19" monitor Silverstone , Thermaltake Armour+ Case

  2. #2


    im getting so sick of this file sharing B.S. They play these five minute commercials in american theatres about how "internet piracy" is wrong and how we all need to "do our part to prevent it" and crap. It makes me want to copy all of my cd's and dvd's and vhs's and vinyl all to disk and send them all over the world. Its all about money, its so sick. Its about the wealthy staying wealthy. Makes me want to crap myself.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005

    Default Re: Aussie ISP in court over song-swapping

    The ARIA vs Comcen case is not about file sharing.

    Its actually about an mp3 search engine site which only had links to mp3s on other sites.
    (the site did not have any mp3s hosted on it)

    Such a case has serious implications.

    If web sites (and even ISPs that provide hosting for them) are being held liable for content on linked websites
    then what is going to happen to the internet in future... will it be a future where nobody can put ANY link to
    another site on their site for fear of possible litigation (as the content of other sites could of course change!)

    What about the big search engines? Will they become targets for this crazyness too?

    Something needs to be done to stop this stupidity.

    If the case was just about mp3s then why aren't they chasing the websites that actually had the mp3s on them? was a customer of comcen, Comcen did not create or run the site, they only hosted it.

    Also they are seperately sueing people who work at the ISP individually for "helping" the mp3 search site.
    (I guess that "help" would probably have been standard customer service such as setting up a database, delegating a domain, providing info about how to upload their pages, etc)

    It does look suspiciously like they may be trying to influence of the case against the company by making it harder for them to find the resources to fight it by starting seperate court cases against the ISP's staff and if this is the case why isn't it seen by the courts as an attempt to subvert the legal system?
    Why aren't there any legal controls on that kind of thing?

    The reason you have not seen much in the media about Comcen's side of the story is that small companies don't have huge amounts of money
    money throw around to hire teams of people write up press releases. (let alone teams of lawyers).

    It seems like they picked on a small ISP as an "easy target" to try to set a precedent after which they will go after the bigger ISPs (and possibly even big search engines like Google)

    The ARIA press releases often seem a bit misleading because they often lump this case together with completely different and unrelated court cases (such as the Kazaa one) and often omit important facts.

    This case is really about whether people running websites are going to be held liable for content on linked websites
    (which of course is an obsurd notion for most of us but obviously not for ARIA's lawyers.) and also whether ISP's are liable not only for content on customer sites they host but also for content on linked sites which are not even hosted by them.

    Its not "just another mp3 case'
    There are other pretty serious issues involved.
    Last edited by starseed6; 01-16-2005 at 09:18 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts