Feeds

back to article Wikileaked cable: AFACT was MPAA’s cat’s-paw

A second cable discussing the “world+dog vs. iiNet” court case has emerged on Wikileaks, confirming the widespread suspicion in Australia that Hollywood was behind both the action and the choice of target. Running just slightly ahead of the last one, this cable was actually classified (“Confidential”, the lowest tier in US …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
Unhappy

so

American Cultural Imperialism goes beyond TV show and movie dumping killing local industries....

5
0
Megaphone

The question is...

... will the Aussies do anything about this? Or will they just do what most on the world do when they are presented with a WL cable that shows them all as being taken for mugs?

ie,, just say 'Meh'

??

3
0
Paris Hilton

will the Aussies do anything about this?

We'll do what we always do with cases like this from the US...

roll over and say "harder!, deeper!, yes! yes!"

Especially if our government and judiciary are involved.

MPAA wouldn't go after Telstra as the Austfailian Government is still a major shareholder - that would be... awkward, wouldn't it?

Paris Hilton angle? Rear, dry.

2
0

Does the court care...

... about being deceived as to the motivations and purposes of the actions brought before it?

Sounds fairly contemptuous to me.

3
0

Mug's? Of course!

"Or will they just do what most on the world do when they are presented with a WL cable that shows them all as being taken for mugs?" The general consensus in Australia is that the average Australian politician IS a mug, is untrustworthy, unreliable, a liar and cheat, only in it for the money, will do anything to stay in power and is a lapdog of the US, so yes, you are spot on there.

3
0
Silver badge

Same here.

I think the concensus in the UK is identical to the above, except that the lapdogs have a choice of masters - US or EU.

1
0

So ...

"The general consensus in Australia is that the average Australian politician IS a mug, is untrustworthy, unreliable, a liar and cheat, only in it for the money, will do anything to stay in power "

So this is different from other politicians ... how?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Just pissin up a rope

Pirates are going to continue to be prosecuted because piracy is a crime. Copyright holders by U.S. law are required to enforce their copyrights or lose them. As we see in many countries new laws are being passed to increase the punishment for piracy. If you're dumb enough to pirate then you're dumb enough to go to prison.

0
21
Silver badge
Facepalm

Why is the MPAA employing spambots?

It's bad form, really.

3
0
Mushroom

Due process

The problem being is that AFACT and MPAA calls you a pirate and demands punishment (Disconnection from the internet etc) before a court actually finds you guilty.

10
0
FAIL

The title is required, and must contain letters and/or digits.

What's US law got to do with Australia?

9
0
Anonymous Coward

OTOH

If you're smart enough to pirate then you're smart enough not to go to prison.

1
1

Copyright != Trademarks

Copyright holders are not required by U.S. law to enforce their copyrights or lose them.

3
1
Silver badge
Devil

re: Pirates are going to continue to be prosecuted

Except that they weren't/aren't in this case.

The ISP is being prosecuted because although piracy might be illegal, the studios can't be bothered going after the ones doing wrong in the law courts.

Effectively they want to bypass the legal process by making the carrier responsible, so that the carrier will bypass the legal process by cutting off users without going to court.

Pirates might be bad, but I lose all sympathy when corporations try to bypass the correct legal process. In fact, I do more than lose sympathy, I become actively antagonistic to said corporations.

Personally, I still have problems with the idea of IP infringement being criminal. Criminality should be reserved for things which are intrinsically wrong - murder, theft etc. Perhaps if the studios hadn't pushed to make the infringement a criminal rather than civil issue, the burden of proof and the cost of prosecuting would be less.

10
0
FAIL

Re: Just pissin up a rope

"Copyright holders by U.S. law are required to enforce their copyrights or lose them."

No, that is trademarks. Copyright holders can choose to ignore infringements at their own will without risking anything.

5
0
Gold badge
Joke

Piracy

Yes yes, everyone knows that piracy is a crime, and at last it is being taken seriously. Those Somalis have got it coming to them! I've seen that they are now installing automatically controlled guns on some ships now.

I'm confused about your reference to copyright though...

7
0
WTF?

If you're dumb enough to pirate then you're dumb enough to go to prison....

... and if you're dumb enough to believe that then your dumb enough to join them. And whilst staring out your prison window you can watch all the yobs on probation for assault on their way to party.

3
0
FAIL

Ropey Pissin' Contest?

But you're wrong there AC. 'Piracy' isn't a crime, it's a civil infringement - there's a world of difference. In fact, in some territories 'piracy' is perfectly lawful and allowed for personal use.

If you're dumb enough to think you can enforce US laws outside of the US then you're dumb enough to suffer the consequential loss of your biggest customer base thanks to the negative PR it generates and ultimately go out of business.

6
0
Devil

But whose job is it to police it?

The problem that I have is that I don't see why iiNet (or any ISP) should be responsible for enforcing this, and I certainly object to anybody monitoring my communications (data or otherwise) without Probable Cause of a *criminal* offence. Probable cause for a *civil* offence is not good enough.

If the Police (and I don't include a helpful AFACT "assisting" Police) have said Probable Cause then they can subpoena the ISP and *reimburse* the ISP for *actual costs* (including labour).

If no criminal prosecution results from a helpful tipoff from AFACT then I expect AFACT to bear the full cost of the investigation. If they catch a criminal, then all good, but no more Public (or ISP) funded fishing expeditions.

I also really wish that people would get the names right and not use the terms "theft" and "stealing" for something that is not. (I also object to "piracy" but I guess that ship has already sailed. haha)

6
0

Titles are for wusses.

"Copyright holders by U.S. law are required to enforce their copyrights or lose them. "

Thats trademarks Dumbass. And besides, Australia doesnt fall under US law.

"As we see in many countries new laws are being passed to increase the punishment for piracy."

As its one of the few places where the US exports more than it imports, i'm not surprised there pushing for an increase in anti-piracy punishments.

"If you're dumb enough to pirate then you're dumb enough to go to prison"

Personally, i believe the punishment should fit the crime, so prison shouldnt be an option except for repeated offences. The punishment should be along the lines of a large fine, Large enough to make a real difference to the person, but not large enough to force them into Bancrupcy, as that achieves nothing.

3
0
Vic
Silver badge

Re: Just pissin up a rope

> Pirates are going to continue to be prosecuted because piracy is a crime.

Piracy is indeed a crime. It is a crime of violence committed on the High Seas.

But it has nothing whatsoever to do with copyright infringement, which - in many jurisdictions - is not a crime.

> Copyright holders by U.S. law are required to enforce their copyrights or lose them.

Bullshit. That's trademarks.

The worst you'll get by not enforcing your rights under copyright is a laches defence for anyone you later decide to prosecute. And if you're prosecuting someone you've been turning a blind eye to for many years, that sounds quite reasonable.

Vic.

3
0
Vic
Silver badge

@AC 08:48

> it's a civil infringement

That's dependent on jurisdiction and context. In the UK, for example, it's a civil infringement unless performed in a commercial setting, when it becomes a crime punishable by up to 10 years inside (Section 107 of the Copyrights Designs and Patents Act 1988). I don't know the law in Australia - I've never been there.

Vic.

0
0

Gentibus est aliis tellus data limine certo: Romanae spatium est urbis et orbis idem

I'm told in http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/msg/01abe481111135fd

that

this means "Other people (only) have territories with fixed borders, only for Rome, the city covers the entire globe." Other loose translations would be "We can -see- you" and "how many nuclear bombs do -you- have? haha. Do the math, 'mate'," and "Don't make me come over there", and "Kneel before Zod."

1
0
Megaphone

MPAA to AFACT

Yo' my biatch!

1
0
Holmes

I can't wait...

...for the US interference on behalf of Microsoft regarding the ISO OOXML accreditation to become public.

2
1

They know its their own fault

Am sure I read somewhere...BBC? That in one of these cables was an admission from the MPAA that piracy was so high in Australia because they never release the movie/tv shows in the Australian DVD region.

A quick look at wiki... Region 4, Australia and South America go together. Which looks a bit odd, why include an English speaking country with Latin American countries?

Its their own fault. Your business is selling product, not lawsuit compensation.

8
0
Big Brother

They know its their own fault - and that is AFACT

There have been a number of movie and music titles I have tried to source locally in Australia, only they were never released here. Music isn't such a problem, I can just buy it from overseas. Oh, but wait! Often I'm presented with the helpful message when trying to do this: "the manufacturer does not permit export to your country" or "We are not able to ship this item to your default shipping address" or some such nonsense.

My favourite movie, "The House of the Spirits", isn't available in region 4 DVD format, on iTunes or any other legit online service that operates in Australia.

The recording industry leaves me no option but to find a pirate copy on the internet.

So AFACT, come banging on my door and I'll slap you in the face with the fact you won't allow me to legally own it.

0
0

Redacted

Not that I doubt the gist, but what does the ellipsis in 'despite the lead role of AFACT … this is an MPAA / American studios production' represent?

0
0
WTF?

US ambassador?

Surely the ambassador has better things to do with his time than deal with some business dispute? I know much of the Western world is run by the corporations, for the corporations, but this is just embarrassing ...

1
0

Not necessarily

Part of an ambassador's job is to look after the nation's interests in that country. Perhaps if there were something really significant and dangerous going on between the US and Australia -- like the threat of another Paul Hogan movie -- you might be right. As it is, ...

0
0
Paris Hilton

Cable?

I don't know if I'm being really dumb here, but what is a 'cable' in this context anyway? Is it an email?

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Like a singing telegram-

Minus the singing.

0
0
Silver badge
Mushroom

Cables

Are communications between a government (and it's various civil service departments) and it's oversees dimplonatic posts. They're too sensitive for public comms networks like email

0
0
g e
Silver badge

Buy your movies and music second hand

Thank you for listening...

0
1
Bronze badge

Is that AFACT?

Or rather, what does AFACT stand for.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

meh

AFACT = Australasian Federation Against Copyright Theft

and in my personal opinion they actually contribute to piracy, due to those annoying, unskipable "piracy is theft" adverts on most dvd's

0
0
Silver badge

A Fact

A Fact Is also something AFACT is unfamiliar with.

0
0
Mushroom

Bastards...

Just that, bastards...

Foul cowering snakes trying to hide their stinky poisonous tracks.

Industry change is inevitable, they r only delaying a ship that has already sailed.

Nuke them from orbit i say... only way to be sure.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.