Despite agreeing last month to preserve copies of files on the university network which may contain evidence of breach of copyright, the University of Melbourne has failed to do so, according to Michael Speck, the managing director of Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI), the company retained by the Australian music industry to conduct surveillance of possible illegal activity.
Speck was commenting to ZDNet Australia following a brief court hearing in Sydney this morning.
The case was bought before the Federal Court by music giants Sony, EMI, and Universal against the University of Melbourne, Sydney University and the University of Tasmania to obtain information MIPI believes may contain evidence of copyright infringement. The music industry is keen for the universities to preserve a copy of the files sought so that they are available if and when the court rules in their favour.
However, Federal Court Justice Tamberlin today deferred ruling on the matter until 9.30am Thursday, and urged the two parties to have "intense and detailed" discussions on the matter before returning to the court.
"We've no confidence they're genuinely moving to preserve the evidence," said Speck. "The longer they prevaricate the less likely there'll be any evidence." He added that at least one other university, which had previously agreed to preserve the files pending the outcome of the case, appeared to be changing its position on this matter.
The University of Melbourne claims the Web sites mentioned in the MIPI allegation are not related to the university. Two students' Web sites contained links to external sites which offer copyrighted music for download, but the links have been removed and the students cautioned.
University of Melbourne vice-principal (information) Helen Hayes has said the university has taken all reasonable steps in the circumstances. The University is very reluctant to allow external investigators to access and search University computer facilities.
"We believe that it raises many concerns, not least of which is student and staff privacy. We will take whatever steps we legally can to protect the privacy of our staff and students," said Hayes in a statement.
As far as I was aware ISP could not be held liable for content viewed or uploaded by its users. Equally, these ISP's owe a duty of care to its users to maintain their privacy. The onus of this whole debacle falls squarely back on music producers to resolve these issue, and not to hunt the consumers & users for failure to regulate their own industry. If music producers EMI, Sony et al got with the program and charged resonable prices for their music, piracy would all but dissappear. We know how much a CD costs, we know they make exhorbitant profits at the cost of the artists. Who is going to buy a Cd when you can burn a good copy for about $5? If these companies charged realistic prices for their product (say $10) then who wouldn't go out and purchase a real CD. (BTW, what happened to the music industry deregulation 5 or so years ago? I can't see much of a decrease in prices since then...) The fact they are now producing discs that donot conform to the 'red book' standard technically means they should not sell these discs as CD as they do. Donot buy any discs that are not CD's by definition. If you do, return it for a full refund.