Sep 3, 2008 5:29 PM | 3 Comments

Worried about getting busted in Australia using BitTorrent? Adam Turner tells you what you need to know.

There's no question that breaching copyright through file-sharing is illegal. Copyright holders in the US have dragged plenty of people through the courts, but several cases have backfired on them spectacularly and the negative publicity would seem to do more damage than the original copyright infringement.

For years Australia's copyright enforcers have privately admitted they have no intention of dragging local file-sharers through the courts US-style. The Australian arm of the copyright police - Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft - now publicly admits it has no interest in prosecuting file-sharers.

What about "private use"? Here's what AFACT says

Executive director Adrianne Pecotic says AFACT has more interest in catching those releasing bootleg movies rather than those sitting on the couch downloading them.

Here's what Pecotic told me this week;

"Our aim is not to be going in and bashing down people's doors, or suggesting that the police should be taking enforcement action against people who are downloading. It's not something we should be wasting police resources on. Police resources are a scarce resource and need to be used very appropriately to target people who are stealing copies of movies and then uploading them."

Will you get burnt from file sharing?

A Sydney man was fined $1000 for uploading a cam-job of The Simpsons Movie last year, but what about couch-bound Australian file-sharers? Pecotic is convinced AFACT's education/FUD campaign will stop 90 per cent of them. According to AFACT's website, the risks of file-sharing include;

- exposure to viruses
- exposure of your private information
- exposure to porn

Of course you can add these to the list of outrageous claims that have been made about file-sharing over the years. Just as branding your enemy a communist during the 1950s was a surefire way of ensuring their downfall, it's been claimed file-sharing supports terrorism and the drug trade.

Only a few weeks ago AFACT director of operations, Neil Gann, was insisting that organised crime syndicates including bikie gangs have moved into DVD and internet piracy, with some channelling millions of dollars in illicit profits into drug dealing ventures.

So every time some school kiddie turns to drugs, it's your fault because you downloaded that episode of Lost.

Not scared away from file-sharing yet?

Just like Big Brother, the copyright police want you to think they're watching your every move.

AFACT also monitors Australian movie file-sharing (no-one seems to talk about television shows). It traces IP addresses back to your ISP, but can't trace it right back to you.

Instead it sends your ISP a nasty email and asks the ISP to send a nasty email to you, pointing out the evils of file-sharing.

Are ISPs on your side?

There's anecdotal evidence that some Australian ISPs are forwarding these emails to customers, although AFACT's Pecotic won't say which ISPs.

She will say that overseas trials of such "I know what you downloaded last summer" emails saw 90 per cent of recipients stop file-sharing. Apparently once they realise it's wrong, and that someone is watching, most people go legit.

Still not scared? AFACT wants Australian ISPs to take sanctions against repeat offenders, eventually cutting off their internet access completely. Similar efforts are underway in the US and the UK.

Australian ISPs have made it clear that it will take more than allegations from AFACT for them to start cutting off customers. Here's a quote from Peter Coroneos, the executive director of the Internet Industry Association;

''AFACT claims to have the IP addresses, but it's alleged," he said in The Age recently. "Even then the ISP can't say who at the address did the downloading. The due legal process must be followed in our legal system. The existing usage terms and conditions talk about illegal activity and not alleged illegal activity. People are presumed innocent until found guilty by a legally constituted court.''

The major ISPs such as BigPond and Optus might possibly comply with such a system - but their target market is more newbies (who are easy to rip off) rather than power users.

Can you imagine the backlash if a progressive Australian ISP such as Internode or iiNet started cutting off customers based on nothing but the word of the copyright police? Customers would abandon them in droves. You can also bet a customer would sue the ISP and AFACT, with support from the likes of the Electronic Frontiers Foundation.

So unless your ISP bows to the demands of the copyright police (and sends you a few warnings first), or the government forces ISPs to treat AFACT's allegations as fact, it seems Australian file-sharers have nothing to fear from the copyright police.

• Welcome to digital radio, it's finally here
• How to setup a pro digital home office
• Podcasts come to TiVo, but can't leave your lounge room
• Is it time to get Naked?
• NineHD lets the breakaway programming Jeannie out of the bottle

TheRAWPrAwN Sep 6, 2008 2:12 AM	Thats Gold!
Magi Sep 8, 2008 1:28 PM	Maybe AFACT's backers have figured out what the American industry still hasn't learnt: attacking your customers is dumb.
mattinahat Sep 8, 2008 5:50 PM	HAHAHAHA Stupid copyright protection agencies. I don't know why they don't just give up. It is an invasion of privacy anyway so you should be able to sue them over that. HAHAHA awesome!! uTorrent all round -- :)