AFACT wants to recoup legal costs
The Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft has begun proceedings to recoup part of the costs of the copyright battle against internet service provider iiNet.
This is also the last week for AFACT to lodge an appeal before the February 25 deadline, but the organisation has not yet decided if it will officiallly proceed.
Federal Court Justice Dennis Cowdroy favoured the internet service provider in its legal battle against AFACT, saying iiNet was not liable for its customers’ downloading habits, because it had done nothing but to provide an internet service to them.
Cowdroy also awarded all court costs – which have been reported at $5.7m – to AFACT.
AFACT spokesperson Rebecca Tabakoff said the association “put in an application for costs to be re-heard and it asks for costs to be adjusted for the parts of the matter that iiNet lost.”
Tabakoff added she was “unaware” of any plans to appeal the decision.
AFACT’s members involved in price fixing? Conspiring to rip off the consumers? Noooooooo
http://www.computerworld.com/s.....ice_fixing
A home electronics retail store has filed a class-action lawsuit against Sony Corp., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Toshiba Corp., LG Electronics Inc., Hitachi Ltd. and several subsidiaries, accusing the electronics manufacturers of colluding to fix prices in the U.S. optical disc drive (ODD) market.
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/33826
MDL Docket No. 1361 read:
“The Plaintiffs have alleged in two separate amended complaints that the Defendants conspired to illegally fix and control the pricing of Music Products sold to consumers through Defendant Distributors’ adoption and utilization of Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) programs in violation of the Sherman Act, state antitrust and unfair competition and/or consumer protection laws. The Plaintiffs have further alleged that as a result of the conspiracy residents of the Plaintiff States and members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class have been injured by paying more for Music Products than they would have paid in the absence of the illegal conduct. The Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims and contentions alleged by the Plaintiffs and any violation of law. The Court has not made any determination as to the merits of any of the claims or defenses of the parties to this Litigation.”
In the hot seat were:
* LABELS: Capitol Records, Inc d/b/a EMI Music Distribution, Virgin Records America, Inc, and Priority Records LLC; Time Warner, Inc, Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corp, WEA, Inc, Warner Music Group, Inc, Warner Bros Records, Inc, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc, and Rhino Entertainment Company; Universal Music & Video Distribution Corporation, Universal Music Group, Inc, and UMG Recordings, Inc; Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc and BMG Music; and, Sony Music Entertainment Inc.
* RETAILERS: MTS, Inc d/b/a Tower Records, Musicland Stores Corp, and Trans World Entertainment Corp.
User ID not verified.