[LINK] Does copyright have a future? [WAS: iinet wins!!]

[Kim Holburn]

On 2010/Feb/09, at 8:35 PM, Stilgherrian wrote:
> On 09/02/2010, at 8:16 PM, Kim Holburn wrote:
>> On 2010/Feb/09, at 6:42 PM, Martin Barry wrote:
>>> $quoted_author = "Kim Holburn" ;
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it's nearly that simple and it has never really been
>>>> tested properly in court (IANAL).  Like I said, how much (how many
>>>> parts) of a file do you have to share to prove significant
>>>> infringement?
>>>
>>> This was all covered in the recent judgement. Even though he found
>>> iiNet did
>>> not authorise the infringement, he still analysed how a court would
>>> treat
>>> the use of bittorrent to obtain copyright material without licence.
>>>
>>> Essentially he deemed that if someone managed to download a complete
>>> file
>>> then it is likely they uploaded the same amount of data to other
>>> peers and
>>> hence has "made available online" a "substantial portion" of the
>>> copyright
>>> material.
>>
>> It's not true.  It really depends on a number of other factors
>> including what the client's download ratio has been set.
>
> Sorry, can you clarify? Which isn't true? That this wasn't the test  
> applied by Cowdroy J? Or that the BitTorrent protocol is more  
> complex than he portrayed in his judgement?

That bittorrent is more complex.  It is possible for instance to  
leech, to only download.  The ratio at any time of download speed to  
upload speed can be quite large especially with clients on asymmetric  
links (like ADSL) where the download speed of the link is much faster  
than the upload speed.  The client can be set to stop offering/seeding  
when a certain ration of download amount to upload amount has been  
reached.  That ratio can be set at anything from zero to say 10.  Each  
client has different defaults.  Upload and download speeds are related  
to the swarm speeds.  Some of the linux distributions have massively  
fast seeders and a normal client downloads the whole distro before it  
does any uploading.

>> The problem as I see it is that iinet wasn't contesting that its  
>> users
>> were infringing copyright.  So the bittorrrent info wasn't contested,
>> therefore not really tested in court.
>
> I believe this to be true, yes.




-- 
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
T: +61 2 61402408  M: +61 404072753
mailto:kim at holburn.net  aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request