It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
UPDATE: A federal judge has handed down its verdict in the country’s first site blocking case, opening the door for a major crackdown on websites hosting illegal streaming services and torrents.
The Federal Court handed down the verdict — the first of its kind — which goes a long way to clarifying the fate of illegal torrent and streaming websites such as The Pirate Bay and SolarMovie in Australia.
The court ruled that internet service providers must “take reasonable steps to disable access” to such sites.
After nearly a year in the court system, the verdict was handed down shortly after 2.15pm today. A handful of tech journalists were on hand and live tweeted the decision, reporting that rights holder who seek to have websites blocked will have to pay a fee to ISPs for doing so.
The judge also appears to support the application of rolling injunctions to make it easier to chase offending sites, but said it must come with court oversight and not be automatic like telcos had argued for.
The rights holders Village Roadshow and Foxtel were also ordered to pays to legal costs of the ISPs.
originally posted by: Dark Ghost
I still believe the "downloading copies of digital content = theft" is a flawed argument and that the major heads of studios pushing for these measures are doing so for selfish, greedy reasons.
Will this ruling have a profound impact on the prevalence of internet piracy in Australia?
originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Dark Ghost
No, theft is theft, digital or otherwise.
That being said, this could be a blow to crowd sourcing information if it's blocking torrent completely.
Owners of digital media can go after someone for massive copyright legally if they are so concerned.
Copyright should only be applicable for 12 months. Yes you heard 12 months. Now you hit Intellectual property. That's just general BS to justify copyright.
Take say a Mr b. Gates, he came up with this idea for a computer thingie. He flogs you his disc(which cost a few pence) for $50 or $60.
Now say that Mr Gates wants a new front door, I fit him one then charge him 100 times the cost. He would grumble at that. Now I say to him "yes but every time someone uses the door(and you can only use that door to get in or out) to go in or go out you HAVE to pay me $1 and so you can't fiddle me I have an army of lawyers and governments watching that you pay up.