[LINK] iiNet case now in court

[Martin Barry]

$quoted_author = "Jan Whitaker" ;
> 
> This line got me:
> The studios' lawyers admitted that DtecNet's evidence could only tell 
> them that an iiNet user was illegally downloading, but could not 
> identify the individual customer.

Of course not, it would give them an IP.

Supplying the IP and a specific time to iiNet would allow the discovery of
which customer's authentication details were associated with that IP at that
time.

It still doesn't link to an individual.

And it's certainly not iiNet's place to play judge, jury and executioner
without whatever "evidence" is provided to them.

So AFACT should really take their "evidence" to a court, compel iiNet to
identify the "user", compel the "user" to show up and defend themselves
against the "evidence".

That's a lot of "s.

cheers
Marty