iiNet 'copyright infringement' case dismissed: Judge says it's impossible to conclude authorisation of infringement

I have been following the iiNet case for quite a while now, so I was quite excited to hear that a decision had finally been made. In what many would call a landmark case, the film industry (represented by The Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT)) brought an action against iiNet for allegedly authorising their customers to infringe the copyright of various movie studios.

On the 4 February 2010, Judge Cowdroy of the Federal Court of Australia dismissed the case against iiNet, awarding costs to iiNet (estimated to be in the vicinity of $4 million).

Judge Crowdroy based his decision on the fact that iiNet has no practical control over it's customers copyright infringement. He differentiated between the Internet, and Bit Torrent (which while a legitimate way of downloading large files, is often used for the purpose of copyright infringement), noting that iiNet had no control over the use of Bit Torrent.

He concluded that iiNet was entitled to the 'safe harbour' provisions because it had a policy on infringement, even if AFACT did not agree with this policy.