* "The mere provision of access to the internet is not [providing] the ‘means’ of infringement."
* "The law recognises no positive obligation on any person to protect the copyright of another."
In an eloquent but fair rebuke to the copyright interests' ISP "responsibility" campaign, the judge concluded: "The result of this proceeding will disappoint the applicants. The evidence establishes that copyright infringement of the applicants’ films is occurring on a large scale, and I infer that such infringements are occurring worldwide. However, such fact does not necessitate or compel, and can never necessitate or compel, a finding [against the ISPs] merely because it is felt that ‘something must be done’ to stop the infringements. An ISP such as iiNet provides a legitimate communication facility which is neither intended nor designed to infringe copyright."* "The law recognises no positive obligation on any person to protect the copyright of another."
A short summary of the 200-page long decision, written by the Judge in recognition of the global importance of the issue and of the need to make its reasonaing and results more accessible, is here.
Attaboy, Cowdroy.


