ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Jobs
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


Online business Toolkit

Kazaa owner denied office-raid appeal

Abby Dinham ZDNet Australia

Published: 08 Oct 2004 12:20 BST

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

Sharman Networks and Brilliant Digital Entertainment (BDE) have been denied application for leave to appeal the Anton Piller orders that facilitated raids on the companies' premises.

Sharman and BDE -- along with affiliated companies -- were raided in February this year on suspicion of music copyright infringement relating to their management and distribution of the Kazaa software.

The Sharman parties argue that "substantial injustice" was caused by the Anton Piller orders, claiming that some material seized was irrelevant to the case and that an appeal is necessary to remove "the slur on the reputation" of the company.

In addition, BDE claimed the raids were a "very considerable invasion of privacy" which has caused them a "real economic loss" from the publicity surrounding the case.

However the full Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Universal Music Australia (and affiliated parties), with judges Black and Stone stating in their reasons for denial that "in our view these matters would not, either individually or cumulatively, occasion injustice to the applicants of such a character and to such a degree as to justify the grant of leave".

The judges added that the seized material is in the custody of a third party and as such was not "insecure or vulnerable in any way" and "while the present situation is undoubtedly inconvenient for the applicants for leave [Sharman and BDE], we do not see this as amounting to substantial injustice."

The chief executive officer of Sharman Networks, Nikki Hemming, said the company was disappointed with the decision. However, she added that it had "no bearing" on the copyright infringement case itself.

"We feel the granting of the Anton Piller order was legally wrong and that was our basis for bringing the matter before the court. We are now focused on winning the current case," said Hemming.

The next hearing is scheduled for 14 October to address any further motions concerning discovery, and to decide if any parties should be struck out from the case.

ZDNet Australia's Abby Dinham reported from Sydney. For more coverage from ZDNet Australia, click here.

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendlyPrint with Konica

Did you find this article useful?
68 out of 121 people found this useful


Full Talkback thread

0 comments

Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:





Sentry Posts Blog

The Technological Singularity

Are we approaching a point when machines may wake up and become self or seemingly self aware? Vernor Vinge in 1993 seemed to think so. He refered to this event as the "technological... More

2 comments

Mobile Operating Systems: MOPS At a Gl...

Mobile Operating Systems: At a Glance Author: Eric Everson, Founder MyMobiSafe Since posting my blog exposing the security Google G1 security issue, I have received a few emails... More

Post a comment

Met Police catch test cheats

I saw the funny side of this press release, I can just imagine the two people sitting in the car giving the answers to the questions. Why they had wires running from under the bonnet... More

Post a comment

Google Chrome

Roundup: Full coverage of the Google Chrome launch

The search giant has launched a beta of its own open-source browser, sending a clear challenge to Microsoft in the way it lets users work with applications More

Blog: Google Chrome has Microsoft's code inside, says MS manager

And furthermore, he says, that's a good thing... More

Blog: Google Chrome — nine things we've found since launch

Google must be very happy with the coverage Chrome has gathered. But it's not all good news... More