There’s no red carpets for the movie where you’re playing the villain

THE personal details of Australian online file-sharers can now be obtained by Hollywood studios, exposing mums and dads to possible penalties in the thousands of dollars.

No movie red carpet where you’re the villain

THE personal details of Australian online file-sharers can now be obtained by Hollywood studios, exposing them to possible penalties of thousands of dollars.

Government, industry and rights holders are hopeful that legal breakthroughs and new services will make mass online copyright infringement a thing of the past, but there are indications that even new widely-hyped streaming services may not be able to land the killer blow on pirates.

Australia’s copyright landscape was shaken to its core this week following a landmak decision by the Federal Court.

A court order made on Wednesday allows the details of internet users who allegedly shared the film Dallas Buyers Club online to be provided to the film’s copyright owner.

READ MORE: Australia, you have a problem

The lawyer representing the copyright owner, Michael Bradley, said “certainly, Australia is one of the jurisdictions with the highest rate of unauthorised downloading and this is a first step from a copyright owner to try to change the balance”.

The customers in question are likely to be sent letters as the copyright owner seeks to recover costs. The form of those letters will be decided by the court later in the month in an effort to prevent the copyright owner scaring customers into paying larger amounts than they might otherwise be required to pay.

But the decision means there is now a formal path for movie companies to pursue litigation against Australian internet users over online piracy. That path was strengthened by another development this week. The Communications Alliance, which represents internet companies like iiNet and Telstra, registered a new code of practice that aims to reduce online piracy.

The code allows content owners to request that internet companies send notices to customers who they believe have pirated content.

If three notices are sent to a customer within 12 months, that customer’s details may be sought by the content owner as part of litigation for copyright infringement.

Communications Alliance chief executive John Stanton said “all stakeholders believe the code can be an important tool toward the shared objective of reducing online copyright infringement.”

The code, which is set to apply from later in the year, gives internet users three chances before rights holders can obtain their details.

But the Dallas Buyers Club decision means that even first-time file-sharers could be legally pursued.

Some legal experts suggest that the code may be considered by courts in future decisions, raising the prospect that a three strikes system will still apply, but for now it’s possible that a single infringement could lead to penalties.

Patrick Gardner, lawyer at technology law specialists legal.consult, said if rights holders weren’t happy with the code, they still had the option of going straight to court.

“The Dallas Buyers Club decision itself doesn’t change this, but it does underscore the availability of this (court) option,” he said.

How much people will be asked to pay if movie companies start pursuing individuals is still to be confirmed. Estimates have been as low as $20 – the price to purchase the film – and as high as in the tens of thousands of dollars, but Mr Gardner said there’s very little guidance available, even from similar cases in the UK.

Justice Nye Perram said in the Federal Court order that “it is not beyond the realm of possibilities that damages of a sufficient size might be awarded under this provision in an appropriately serious case in a bid to deter people from the file sharing of films’’. And Choice campaigns manager Erin Turner warned that even the three-strikes code opens the door to large financial demands from studios and formalises the process of suing individuals. “This isn’t a gentle education scheme – it’s a pathway to legal action, whether that’s speculative invoicing or a court case.”

Online piracy in Australia is also under attack from Parliament and streaming content providers. The government introduced legislation to Parliament in March that would block overseas websites that support piracy. Although Labor is still considering the detail in the bill, the party is expected to support its core proposals and the first websites may be blocked before the end of the year.

And then there is the fierce competition among new streaming services such as Netflix and Presto. Netflix and music service Spotify have previously claimed to reduce piracy because they provide content at a price and in a form that has been demanded by consumers.

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said last month “there’s big piracy in Australia, and part of that is because there is not an easy, affordable service,” he said. He told investors this year that piracy “continues to be one of our biggest competitors”.

Presto is owned by Foxtel, which is half-owned by News Corp Australia, publisher of The Advertiser.

Originally published as There’s no red carpets for the movie where you’re playing the villain