Roadshow Films Pty Ltd & Ors v iiNet Limited

Roadshow Films Pty Ltd and others (the copyright holders) brought proceedings against iiNet Limited (an internet service provider) in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that iiNet had facilitated copyright infringement by its customers. The copyright holders contended that iiNet was authorising or authorising the infringement of their films and television programs by enabling its subscribers to download and share these works using the BitTorrent peer-to-peer file-sharing system. The dispute centred on whether iiNet's provision of internet services, and its knowledge of and alleged inaction regarding customer infringement, constituted authorisation of that infringement under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the High Court of Australia was whether iiNet had authorised the infringement of copyright by its users. This required the Court to consider the meaning of "authorise" in section 101(1) of the Copyright Act, particularly in the context of an internet service provider's relationship with its customers. The Court also had to determine whether iiNet's knowledge of the infringing activities of its subscribers, coupled with its alleged failure to take reasonable steps to prevent such infringement, amounted to authorisation.

The High Court, by majority, held that iiNet had not authorised the infringement of copyright. The Court reasoned that authorisation required more than merely providing the means for infringement; it involved some form of control or enablement that went beyond the passive provision of internet services. While iiNet was aware that some of its users were infringing copyright, the Court found that it did not have the necessary degree of control over the users' activities to be considered an authoriser. The Court distinguished between providing the infrastructure for communication and actively authorising the infringing use of that infrastructure, concluding that iiNet's role was akin to that of a telecommunications provider, not an infringer.

The High Court therefore dismissed the appeal, upholding the Full Federal Court's decision that iiNet had not authorised copyright infringement.