Australian ISPs Reject Calls To Police Their Users

jon_cooper writes "After recent setbacks in the RIAA's lawsuits, the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has decided to try a different approach in Australia - they want ISPs to do their dirty work for them. Australian ISPs, though, have soundly rejected calls from AFACT to slow down or terminate user accounts that AFACT has determined are being used to distribute copyrighted works. Telstra (one of the larger ISPs in question) had this to say: 'We do not believe it is up to the ISPs to be judge, jury and executioner in relation to the issue when the content owners have any number of legal avenues to pursue infringements.'"

Comments

Re:Same ISPs as in the U.S.?

[Narcissus]

And here I was thinking that 'multi' (ie. 'multiple') just meant "more than one" ( eg. http://www.answers.com/multiple&r=67 ). Just because 'bi' means "two" doesn't mean that 'multi' can't be two as well.

Otherwise where do you stop? I don't know for sure, but I would guess that technically there is a way to refer to any number in that way ("bi", "tri", "quad"...) so if you can't use 'multi' when you can also use 'bi' then when can you use it, exactly?

Re:Same ISPs as in the U.S.?

[james_orr]

Of course it makes them multinational. Just like the airport here calls itself an international airport because it has a couple flights to Canada.