In addition to being an Exetel user, I am studying undergraduate law at the University of New South Wales. As part of my Honours program, I am completing a paper on copyright liability risk for Australian Internet Service Providers. Part of my paper will be devoted to the measures taken by Australian ISPs to minimise their risk of copyright liability as a result of their subscribers' internet access.
I am writing in hope that you may provide me with more information about the measures implemented by Exetel to identify, monitor and decrease its risk of copyright liability.
From what I understand, Exetel implements the following measures in relation to copyright compliance:
- A (relatively) comprehensive set of contractual terms that relate to copyright infringement, including its Acceptable Use Policy (particularly clauses 2.1, 2.2, 4.1 and 4.2).
- A blocking system (AUP, clause 2.2) upon receipt of copyright infringement notices.
- A 3-strikes policy (AUP, clause 4.3)
- Controlling bandwidth of P2P connections (General T&Cs, clause 17.3)
I am hoping you can provide me with more information about:-
(1) Receipt and treatment of copyright infringement notices sent by organisations such as MIPI and AFACT:
- How often are these notices sent to Exetel?
- Is the blocking system automatically or manually processed?
- What percentage of users have had their accounts suspended/terminated?
- Has any customer successfully contested their conduct "by providing a valid defence [to an infringement notice] in writing to the issuer of the notice that is satisfactory to Exetel" (AUP, clause 4.3)?
- What does Exetel mean by a 'valid defence'?
- Does Exetel routinely scan its webspace for infringing files?
Lastly, I wish to thank Exetel for providing the inspiration to come up with this topic, especially the writings on John's blog (although, I must admit, the legal issues are murkier and more grey than John, or users on this forum, have put them).