Is this the victory for film pirates we think it is?

[Archiee]

Maybe the Dallas Buyers Club case against film piracy wasn't a backfire after all. Perhaps powerful lobby groups who have the ear of politicians can now say, "See, the courts don't help us. We need the internet filter." Luke Buckmaster writes.

 

Not long ago Australian movie pirates were nervously checking news reports and wondering whether the axe might eventually fall.

When word arrived more than a year ago that producers of Oscar-winning Matthew McConaughey drama Dallas Buyers Club were launching legal proceedings against more than 4700 iiNet customers who allegedly acquired the film via online torrents, more than a few people in the country presumably shifted in their seats and cleared their browsing history.

This week the Federal Court rejected a second bid from US company Voltage Pictures to obtain their contact information. Justice Nye Perram made an order to terminate the proceedings on February 11 after previously ruling that the privacy of the alleged pirates needed to be maintained.

During a hearing that lasted for less than a minute, he was good enough to throw in a movie reference:

It needs to be kept in mind that what is before the court is a preliminary discovery application, not Ben-Hur.

The only option left for Dallas Buyers Club LLC is to launch a costly appeals process. The decision is being widely reported as a landmark ruling and the case seems doomed to fail.

If it does and a legal precedent is set, it is entirely possible online pirates in Australia will feel more empowered than ever and more confident in getting away with not paying for the content they watch. Perhaps Hollywood's attempt to prosecute torrenters has backfired, with legal teams in the future understandably reluctant to take up the charge.

Even if Voltage Pictures' plan worked, it's hard to imagine that successful pursuit of a relatively small group of people would cause large swathes of the population to stop what they're doing (particularly with ISP-disguising tools such as VPN unlockers available).

That is assuming the company was envisioning a world where everybody pays for what they watch; more likely they were trying to fleece some cash. But it's not unreasonable to think the case might be connected to larger motives pursued by Hollywood studios. In 2011 a WikiLeaks cable revealed the Motion Picture Association of America used the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft as a cat's paw to attack local pirates, worried that doing so directly would be construed as big bullies versus the little guys.

The Dallas Buyer's Club case will remind them not to bugger around with small grabs but to go for the big prize. In June, a bill to allow copyright owners to pursue court injunctions forcing ISPs block sites such as PirateBay was passed in Australia with bipartisan support. Maybe the Dallas Buyers Club case wasn't a backfire after all. Perhaps powerful lobby groups who have the ear of politicians can now say, "See, the courts don't help us. We need the filter."

While it would be wrong to say they are calling the shots in this debate, it would be more ridiculous to suggest they don't have a degree of political influence. It was revealed earlier this year that Village Roadshow was the largest single political media donor in the year 2013-2014, pumping more than $500,000 into the major parties.

Such measures are nothing new. The story of how the big guns in tinsel town have pursued Australian pirates over the years is a long and complicated one. Like many Hollywood-produced conspiracy movies, some of the (real-life) plot points beggar belief. It is a wild and largely untold history of movie piracy in Australia. And it makes court room hearings and the passing of legislation seem rather sedate by comparison.

Remember those old "Have You Got What You Paid For?" warnings at the start of video cassettes? They were developed by the Australasian Film and Video Security Office (AFVSO) which was established in the early '80s by a consortium of major Hollywood studios. Back then the battle against pirates wasn't confined to court rooms and corridors of power: it was fought more directly and real blood was spilt.

Around the turn of the century, in years before fast internet speeds turned the focus of piracy online, DVDs and VCDs were able to be copied and circulated in unprecedented numbers. Lured by ease of manufacturing and comparatively light penalties, criminal outfits turned from dealing drugs to dealing discs. The AFVSO collaborated with Australian Federal Police on raids, uncovering meth-like piracy labs hidden in places such as roof cavities and basements.

Like in any war, the other side fought back. In 2003 an overseas office of the AFVSO was firebombed and an employee's face slashed with a razor. The head of the organisation was so concerned about the safety of its Melbourne representative that bodyguards were hired to follow him wherever he went.

The threat of danger towards employees, who regularly received death threats, was so real the Sydney office closed its doors and moved to a secret location. The organisation disbanded not long after. It was replaced by the Australian Federation Against Copyright, established in 2004 by the same major studios including Roadshow, Paramount, Sony, Disney and Fox.

They are now known by the friendlier-sounding Australian Screen Association, which keeps a reasonably low profile. Its website has a function reminiscent of the Have You Got What You Paid For era: a form that allows you to snitch on a person or business you believe is pirating.

Over the years in the battle against pirates in Australia, much has changed and much has remained the same. Irrespective of how the Dallas Buyers Club case plays out, Hollywood's war against Australians who rip off their content isn't over. Not by a long shot.