Global Freedom of Expression

Español

Television Broadcasts Ltd. v. Telstra Corp.

Closed Mixed Outcome

Key Details

  • Mode of Expression
    Electronic / Internet-based Communication
  • Date of Decision
    September 20, 2018
  • Outcome
    Blocking or filtering of information, Injunction or Order Granted
  • Case Number
    [2018] FCA 1434
  • Region & Country
    Australia, Asia and Asia Pacific
  • Judicial Body
    First Instance Court
  • Type of Law
    Intellectual Property Law
  • Themes
    Content Regulation / Censorship
  • Tags
    Copyright, Intellectual Property, Internet, Internet Service Providers, Media Ownership, Videos, Media Outlets, Broadcasting Networks, Media/Press

Content Attribution Policy

Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:

  • Attribute Columbia Global Freedom of Expression as the source.
  • Link to the original URL of the specific case analysis, publication, update, blog or landing page of the down loadable content you are referencing.

Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.

Case Analysis

Case Summary and Outcome

The Australian Federal Court ruled in favor of a Hong Kong based broadcaster, ordering ISPs to block access to online sites facilitating copyright infringement though streaming on set-top boxes and virtual stores such as Google Play and Apple’s App Store, among others. The case was brought by Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) which provides a pay-tv service in Australia allowing subscribers to access TVB’s copyrighted television broadcasts via the internet. The Court applied a three pronged test, established in the Copyright Act, to determine whether a blocking injunction should be granted.  The court found that the ISPs 1) facilitate access to the offending sites; 2) that the offending sites infringe TVB’s copyrights; and 3) that the primary purpose of the offending sites was to facilitate copyright infringement by making material available online in Australia without the consent of copyright owners. In light of this, the Court granted TVB an injunction and ordered each of the ISPs to disable access to the target online locations within 15 days.


Facts

Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) is a producer and broadcaster of TV content based in Hong Kong, an administrative region of the People’s Republic of China. TVB provides a pay-tv service in Australia allowing subscribers to access TVB’s copyrighted television broadcasts via the internet.

TVB submitted an application to the Federal Court of Australia seeking an order that Telstra Corporation and other internet services providers (collectively “the ISPs”) disable access to online locations (“the offending sites”) that allowed users to access TVB content on “set-top streaming boxes.”

The primary purpose of the target online locations to was to enable set-top boxes to stream and users to view television programs from TVB and various third parties. Users could access the offending sites using the services of the ISPs. TVB sought the injunction (order) under Section 115A of the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Act, 2015 (“the Copyright Act”), to end the streaming of TV programs facilitated by access to the offending sites.


Decision Overview

Nicholas, J., delivered the judgment of the Federal Court of Australia.

The main issue before the court was whether TVB’s copyrighted material was made available in Australia via the ISPs without the permission of the owners in breach of TVB’s copyrights or licenses. TVB’s legal argument in seeking relief under section 115A of the Copyright Act was that the primary purpose of the offending sites was to facilitate copyright infringement by making copyright-protected films available for viewing online without TVB’s consent.

Section 115A of the Copyright Act poses three requirements for determining whether a blocking injunction should be granted.

  1. The ISP is a carriage service provider that provides access to the offending sites, each of which is located outside Australia;
  2. The offending sites infringe or facilitate copyright infringement; and
  3. The primary purpose of the offending sites are to infringe or facilitate copyright infringement.

The Court primarily relied on two prior judgments delivered by the Federal Court of Australia — Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v. Telstra Corp. and Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd. v. TPG Internet Pty Ltd. — in understanding the meaning and application of Section 115A of the Copyright Act. TVB easily met the first two requirements for receiving the blocking order — that the ISPs facilitate access to the offending sites and that the offending sites infringe TVB’s copyrights. However, the third requirement that “the primary purpose” of the offending sites be to infringe or facilitate copyright infringement required closer inspection.

In determining whether the primary purpose of an online site is to infringe or facilitate infringement, it is necessary to look at the site’s function from a broader perspective. In this case, the offending sites were designed to provide users with access to TVB television content consisting of movies, television series, news, weather, and more. There was no information suggesting that the offending sites had obtained the permission of the copyright owners to make the content available to online users. Moreover, TVB’s exclusive licenses  to some content did not give any permission to the offending sites to share the copyrighted content.

Thus, the Court found that the primary purpose of the offending sites was to facilitate copyright infringement by making material available online in Australia without the consent of copyright owners. In light of this, the Court granted TVB an injunction under Section 115A of the Copyright Act, and the Court required each of the ISPs to disable access to the target online locations within 15 days.


Decision Direction

Quick Info

Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.

Mixed Outcome

This case is about striking a balance between the freedom of expression on the internet and the intellectual property rights of copyright holders. While there is some risk that blocking of sites under the Copyright Act will harm lawful expression on the internet, the judgment promotes the protection of intellectual property rights by blocking websites whose purpose is to infringe copyrights.

The case reinforces a strict threshold for blocking a site by requiring that copyright infringement be “the primary purpose” of the site in question (emphasis added). This is an intentionally high bar for the copyright holder to meet as a safeguard against any potential abuse, thus minimizing the risk that the Copyright Act will harm free and lawful expression.

Global Perspective

Quick Info

Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.

Table of Authorities

National standards, law or jurisprudence

  • Austl., Roadshow Films Pty Ltd. v. Telstra Corp., (2018) 132 IPR 1
  • Austl., Roadshow Films Pty Ltd. v. Telstra Corp., (2016) 248 FCR 178
  • Austl., Universal Music Austl. Pty Ltd. v. TPG Internet Pty Ltd., (2017) 348 ALR 493
  • Austl., Copyright Act 1968

    Sec. 115A

  • Austl., Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Act 2015

Case Significance

Quick Info

Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

This judgment falls in line with two other recent judgments from the Federal Court of Australia, Roadshow Films Pty Ltd. v. Telstra Corp. and Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd. v. TPG Internet Pty Ltd. In all cases, the Court granted injunctions to copyright owners to block sites whose primary purpose was infringing or facilitating copyright infringement, thereby providing apt protection to intellectual property.

Those two cases in conjunction with Television Broadcasts Limited v. Telstra Corporation will collectively have persuasive value inside and outside Australia as jurisdictions worldwide determine the bounds, requirements, and standards for blocking access to pirating websites for electronic devices, as well as the burdens placed on internet service providers to block infringing sites.

Official Case Documents

Official Case Documents:


Reports, Analysis, and News Articles:


Attachments:

Have comments?

Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.

Send Feedback