We've written a few times before about online piracy concerning the illegal downloading of Dallas Buyers Club by Australians and the court case brought against local ISPs. It seems that this saga is far from over though with a new judgment being handed down by the Federal Court to prevent speculative invoicing from taking place.
The story below comes from the Sydney Morning Herald.
Dallas Buyers Club Dealt Major Blow in Federal Court iiNet Piracy Case:
The attempt to demand money from thousands of Australians who allegedly pirated the movie Dallas Buyers Club has suffered a major blow, with the Federal Court refusing to order the release of the downloader's names and addresses unless the movie rights holder dramatically changes its claim and backs it up with a $600,000 bank bond.
In a scathing judgment handed down on Friday, Justice Nye Perram refused to lift a temporary stay on the release of the contact details after reading the demands that the rights holders for Dallas Buyers Club (DBC) intended to make.
Justice Perram described DBC's proposal to charge those who shared the film thousands of dollars in licencing fees as "so surreal as not to be taken seriously".
"If such a claim were made in a proceeding for copyright infringement in this Court I am satisfied that it would be dismissed summarily without trial ... as a case having no reasonable prospects of success," Justice Perram said.
In April, Dallas Buyers Club LLC won the right to obtain the names and addresses of about 4700 Australians it believed had infringed copyright by sharing the film online.
The targeted individuals were customers of Australian internet service providers (ISPs) iiNet, Dodo, Internode, Amnet Broadband, Adam Internet and Wideband Networks.
However, Justice Perram had expressed concern at the potential for speculative invoicing — when a rights holder sends a letter to an alleged pirate making unreasonable, unsubstantiated demands — and ordered he review any drafts of correspondence Dallas Buyers Club LLC proposed to send to alleged pirates.
In Friday's ruling, Justice Perram said he had rejected "several versions" of such correspondence which the rights holder had submitted because they had overreached in their demands in proposed letters to customers.
In particular, he found that DBC was not entitled to demand licencing fees from alleged pirates or fees for illicitly downloading movies other than Dallas Buyers Club.
Justice Jerram found that the company might be entitled to request that people pay the equivalent cost of renting the film on iTunes and the costs DBC incurred in finding the name of each alleged downloader.
"...the idea that DBC's damages should equal the value of what was taken from it without its permission is not, self-evidently, a ridiculous claim and, indeed, has a certain biblical charm," Justice Jerram said.
Due to a confidentiality agreement, Justice Perram would not disclose the sums arrived at by the rights holder, other than that they were "substantial".
However, he said that, even if DBC agreed to drop its demands, he would only lift the stay on the release of the downloaders' details if it agreed to back up this promise with a $600,000 bond which it would forgo if it breached the court's orders.
This was necessary, his honour said, because the court had no power to punish DBC for contempt if it "failed to honour that undertaking".
"Having had access to what it is that DBC proposes to demand ... and the potential revenue it might make if it breached its undertaking to the Court not to demand such sums, it seems to me that I should set the bond at a level which will ensure that it will not be profitable for it to do so.
"I will set the bond at $600,000 which, if the undertaking is given, is to be lodged by bank guarantee with the Registrar."
Article written by Paul Bibby and Hannah Francis and originally published on smh.com.au.