Stilgherrian (@stilgherrian)

Wentworth Falls NSW AU

The below is an off-site archive of all tweets posted by @stilgherrian ever

August 4th, 2010

Cobden discusses when copyright breaches become crimes: when “commercial scale”, arguing referring to police is appropriate.

via TweetDeck

Cobden notes that the T in AFACT is for “theft”. iiNet referring notices about a crime to the police is appropriate.

via TweetDeck

Justice Emmett seems unimpressed with the bundled emails being all out of chronological order.

via TweetDeck

Cobden argues that iiNet could not use DTechNet’s method of investigating BitTorrent usage without itself breaching copyright.

via TweetDeck

Cobden seems to be arguing that iiNet/IIA were trying to negotiate in good faith but AFACT cut off communication.

via TweetDeck

Cobden: “One can detect a certain leisurely interval between correspondence”, on AFACT’s slow responses to IIA letters.

via TweetDeck

Cobden runs court thru 2007-2008 correspondence between AFACT and IIA about a potential code of practice etc.

via TweetDeck

iiNet’s Richard Cobden corrects the estimate of robot copyright notices received from AFACT to be more like 2500 per month.

via TweetDeck

Day 3 of the has begun, and it begins with procedural matters about stuff from yesterday.

via TweetDeck

@DrRimmer Apparently Richard Cobden is appearing for iiNet, or so say the stories previously published.

via TweetDeck in reply to DrRimmer

@Nickhodge I am not wearing stockings. I am a wonton woman. Sorry, a wanton woman. There’s a difference.

via TweetDeck in reply to NickHodgeMSFT

For the story so far, @joshgnosis wraps up yesterday’s action http://bit.ly/diZHUS

via TweetDeck

Why is it midnight?

via TweetDeck

@franksting It’s not my blog which will cause grief but this at the ABC thing http://bit.ly/916w0P

via TweetDeck in reply to franksting

I can probably apportion blame to others, but I understand discretion. If they wish to implicate themselves then so be it.

via TweetDeck

@jdub AFAIK no-one’s called me a traitor yet. Early days.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to jdub

Home. Alive. Mostly.

via Twitter Web Client

Not as much hate mail as I’d expected, that’s a good sign.

via Twitter Web Client

This will not end well.

via Twitter Web Client

So where are you people?

via Twitter Web Client

Kudos to @rycrozier at iTnews for this: “iiTrial: Concerns iiNet could be re-sued even if it wins appeal” http://bit.ly/9RKJAr

via TweetDeck

@jasonlangenauer Talking to yourself. Bad sign.

via TweetDeck

@jasonlangenauer I think I can buy you a drink or three, should you feel the need.

via TweetDeck

@engochick I would not like to see you killed by your husband, or anyone really. At least not until the invoices have been signed. ;)

via TweetDeck in reply to engochick

Thanks @ForsakenDAemon @DanBEdmonds @timelady @drueyjay @iphoon but I will seriously cop flak for this article http://bit.ly/916w0P

via TweetDeck

I am at The Forbes Hotel on York and King Streets, shortly to be joined by @wolfcat. Anyone else?

via TweetDeck

Met at @abcunleashed: “Gay marriage an irrelevant sideshow” http://bit.ly/916w0P

via TweetDeck

Me at @zdnetaustralia: “AFACT didn’t explain notices to iiNet” http://bit.ly/ciyUmP

via TweetDeck

Lancaster warned the judges that his next theme would take 40 mins, so court is now adjourned until 1015 tomorrow.

via TweetDeck

@renailemay Clealy I’m thinking of “stiff” as in “drink”.

via TweetDeck in reply to renailemay

There is also new material relating to obligations under the US Free Trade Agreement. This could get technical…

via TweetDeck

Lancaster hands the judges a new folder-full of stiff relating to s116AH of the Copyright Act http://bit.ly/cB9P6B and US DMCA

via TweetDeck

Lancaster argues that legislation suggests ISPs have latitude in the “reasonable implementation” of their policies.

via TweetDeck

Barrister Richard Lancaster SC for iiNet is now beginning a discussion of Safe Harbour provisions of COpyright Act.

via TweetDeck

Cobden has been discussing meaning of “substantial part” and making available “to the public”, referring to precedents.

via TweetDeck

@DrRimmer iiNet started yesterday, and @joshgnosis sat thru that, so he may have seen more.

via TweetDeck in reply to DrRimmer

@DrRimmer Privacy was touched upon this morning, but today is only part of iiNet’s response in this appeal.

via TweetDeck in reply to DrRimmer

Cobden is now discussing “substantial part” in the context of a BitTorrent transmission.

via TweetDeck

Cobden discussing how many “infringing acts” happen in different technical circumstances.

via TweetDeck

RT @jmacmullin: You mean “authorisation” doesn’t always mean “authorisation”? [No, more that it has many meanings.]

via TweetDeck

Cobden explains why Universal Music v Cooper http://bit.ly/bnYAKU was a different kind of case to this one.

via TweetDeck

The discussion of the legal meaning of “authorisation” continues.

via TweetDeck

@scottsues I wouldn’t try to read too much into that business, but I won’t be providing explanations either. There should be mysteries.

via TweetDeck in reply to scottsues

Cobden explaining the importance of people’s internet access to them, and the consequences of having it all cut off.

via TweetDeck

Justice Emmett and Cobden discussing dictionary definitions etc of “authorise” through the 20th Century.

via TweetDeck

iiNet’s barrister Richard Cobden is wrapping up his discussion about iiNet’s “authorisation” or not of copyright violation.

via TweetDeck

The appeal proceedings has resumed.

via TweetDeck

Outside the courtroom there’s an original Gloria Petyarre painting, “Untitled (Leaves)” from 2000.

via Twitter Web Client

ZDNet story filed! Court is adjourned until 2pm.

via TweetDeck

Cobden runs through elements of iiNet’s conduct that AFACT claimed amounted to supporting BitTorrent, encouraging file sharing.

via TweetDeck

Cobden counters that a process has to be manageable, not occupy ISP’s entire time. AFACT might be the first of many complainants.

via TweetDeck

Justice Nicholas asks whether this isn’t just the ISP’s job of having a repeat-offender policy or any sort.

via TweetDeck

Cobden explains how responding to an initial complaint is just the first step in building a process to escalate complaints. Work!

via TweetDeck

As the judges and iiNet’s barrister discuss finer details, the online media folks clatterly turn their notes into stories to file.

via TweetDeck

The judges are discussing with iiNet’s barrister Richard Cobden the details of how the AFACT / DTechNet data is read.

via TweetDeck

AFACT effectively said, Cobden says, “You’re an ISP, you’re technical, you sort it out”

via TweetDeck

Cobden says AFACT never explained to iiNet how their data was gathered and what it meant.

via TweetDeck

In Court 1 this morning: 3 judges, 5 staff, 13 lawyers, 20 observers including media.

via TweetDeck

@grantshow “Clear road” has actually been the railway terminology for a train-free track ahead pretty much forever.

via TweetDeck in reply to grantshow

This entire discussion is about what might constitute a reasonable response by iiNet to AFACT’s infringement notices.

via TweetDeck

Cobden explains that to identify or even count the allegedly infringing customers from AFACT data, data matching work is required

via TweetDeck

I should mention that I haven’t listened to @RNFutureTense yet. My bit was recorded last week, so I may or may not be making sense.

via TweetDeck

@jamezpolley If I find a summary of the GetUp! v AEC thingo I’ll ping you. I won’t get a chance to look until this afternoon.

via TweetDeck in reply to jamezpolley

I was on ABC @RNFutureTense today, federal election and social media etc. Podcast at http://bit.ly/bBibyL

via TweetDeck

Story filed for @zdnetaustralia! What next?

via TweetDeck

Writing. Shoosh.

via TweetDeck

RT @erkpod: OH: You can tell a lot about a bloke by the way he eats a battered sav.

via TweetDeck

@SnarkyPlatypus Ils ne sont pas dignes de confiance. Ils ont ces petits yeux globuleux.

via TweetDeck in reply to SnarkyPlatypus

If you were following me for yesterday, follow @joshgnosis today ‘cos I was just filling in for him. Or, erm, follow the hashtag.

via TweetDeck

Thu plan: Quick piece for @zdnetaustralia; client phone calls; record for “A Series of Tubes”; lunch; implode; remainder TBA.

via TweetDeck

@RalphBassfeld I am willing to make an exception for olives, but this is a generous concession.

via TweetDeck in reply to RalphBassfeld

@SnarkyPlatypus Bonjour. J’ai lancé une guerre contre des fruits à noyau en général. Et vous?

via TweetDeck in reply to SnarkyPlatypus

Transcript of yesterday’s High Court challenge by GetUp! to AEC enrolment deadline http://bit.ly/bQyc74 HT @peterjblack

via TweetDeck

And now it begins…

via TweetDeck

@facibus We should have a War on Porridge.

via TweetDeck in reply to facibus

Of all of these http://bit.ly/9jsBfU this one is my favourite for today http://bit.ly/9MJoJP Ping @ApostrophePong

via TweetDeck

And don’t get me started on parsnips! Unless, well, you know… But, like, that’s a different thing anyway.

via TweetDeck

I’ve never liked porridge. Oats for humans? No, oats is for horses. Horses you never really liked that much to begin with.

via TweetDeck

“How the War on Drugs is a war on class”, a very US perspective http://bit.ly/bOV6u7

via TweetDeck

Eggs are just so complicated http://bit.ly/aXjG0I

via TweetDeck

제발 무슨 일이 있었는지 설명합니다

via TweetDeck

Emerges. With extreme prejudice.

via TweetDeck

I am not Andrew Bolt.

via TweetDeck

@franksting I’m not going to look at the comments until the morning. I don’t have enough vodka handy for that.

via TweetDeck in reply to franksting

@franksting Oh I can’t stand watching I just read the transcript if I’m forced to by circumstances.

via TweetDeck in reply to franksting