Archive | November, 2008

Federal Court: Clarus Telecom misled consumers

The Federal Court yesterday made declarations that Clarus Telecom breached the Trade Practices Act by misrepresenting (through their telemarketers) that their services were affiliated with or provided on behalf of Telstra.

The declarations, which were made by consent, came about after the ACCC issued proceedings against Clarus at the start of September over the conduct of its telemarketers.

In addition to the declarations, Clarus was ordered (by consent) to:

  • publish corrective notices on their website
  • publish an article educating the industry about compliance with the Act
  • pay the ACCC’s costs of the court proceedings
  • implement a Trade Practices compliance program

The ACCC media release is available here.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Sydney internet café cops copyright fines

An internet café run by Interville Technology pleaded guilty in a Sydney court yesterday to 40 charges of digital copyright infringement, copping a fine of $82,000.  It has also been ordered to forfeit terminals and servers used in connection with the infringements.

It’s a different kind of case to the recent iiNet litigation.  Interville was storing and serving up whole copyright files, not just supplying bandwidth that was used by customers for peer-to-peer file sharing.  But the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft is involved in both cases, and a win is a win.  The court result underscores how much is at stake for iiNet and its shareholders.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

ACMA: Power without theory ?

OK, it’s a harsh headline, but we really wish ACMA would more generously share its thoughts about compliance with the Spam Act and Do Not Call Register Act.

The potent powers that these laws give the authority carry a moral obligation to educate as well as punish.  We’ve argued the point before, and now there’s another case where the Communications Authority’s communication isn’t as authoritative as it could be.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

ACCC ‘getting very cranky’ about premium mobile services

ACCC Enforcement Commissioner Sarah Court has identified premium mobile services as an ACCC hot spot for 2009.

Speaking to a packed audience at the Law Institute of Victoria, the former Australian Government lawyer indicated a personal view that the Commission is ‘getting very cranky’ about ringtone and wallpaper download services that ‘are costing consumers millions and millions of dollars.’

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

Hyarchis rep objects to ACMA spam warning

We recently reported on a Spam Act warning given by ACMA to SMS marketer Hyarchis.

Hyarchis’ Australian representative Peter Pichler is reported as rejecting the warning, arguing that it arose out of an incident where a mischievous third party entered a bogus phone number on a Hyarchis social networking site.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

iiNet case: Court document reveals investigator sting

A private investigator who spent 15 months as an iiNet customer provides key evidence for last week’s copyright infringement action against the Perth-based ISP.

Some are calling it ‘entrapment’ but the tactic of gathering evidence by signing up as a paying customer is legal in Australia.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 42 }

Lawyers release copyright Safe Harbour kit

News of legal action against ISP iiNet for alleged copyright breach has provoked every reaction from ‘What nonsense!’ to ‘The sky is falling!’

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion – including the army of ‘bush lawyers’ on Whirlpool.

But that doesn’t change the fact that a prudent ISP needs to understand how to bring itself inside the copyright ‘safe harbour’ rules.

Lawyers Logie-Smith Lanyon have provided a solution with their ISP Copyright Safe Harbour Kit, a detailed info-pack that’s essential reading for every Australian ISP.  Download contents and sample pages.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }

iiNet Case: Why the ‘judge, jury and executioner’ argument is wrong

iiNet and many of its supporters argue that the company cannot terminate users on the basis of mere allegations, and can’t play ‘judge, jury and executioner’.

Nice try, but legally misses the point of the Copyright Act.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 4 }

iiNet case: The three legal questions that matter

The internet is awash with comment on the copyright infringement action by Village Roadshow and others against iiNet.

When all is said and done, the court has to decide three legal questions.

In this article, CSP Central helps you to focus on the real issues.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 14 }

Film heavyweights sue iiNet for copyright infringement

Breaking News: A host of major film studios and Channel 7 have today launched legal proceedings in the Federal Court against iiNet alleging copyright infringement.

The studios are claiming that iiNet infringed copyright by not stopping iiNet customers from using BitTorrent to infringe the studios’ copyright in their respective films.

Under Australian law, a person can be liable for infringement if he or she ‘authorises’ another person to infringe copyright.

Continue Reading →

Share
Comments { 0 }