• Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • Blog - Written by on Tuesday, October 4, 2011 9:47 - 21 Comments

    AFACT exposed: Insider investigator tells his story

    blog If you’ve always wondered what life is like at the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft, wonder no more. A former investigator for Australia’s self-appointed online piracy watchdog has spilled the beans on his activities working for the organisation.

    Some of our favourite sentences from the interview with private investigator Gavin Warren conducted by TorrentFreak relate to “Neil Gane, a former British Hong Kong Police Inspector who had been working in Malaysia with the MPAA against piracy”:

    “Mr Gane gave the impression of being very committed to stopping the evil scourge of piracy and was far more media savvy than his predecessor … Gane understood that the media was an essential tool towards AFACT’s goal of getting tougher copyright legislation in place.”

    Gane, of course, is still with AFACT as the group’s executive director.

    Now at this stage, it’s pretty much impossible to verify much of what Warren has alleged here; I doubt AFACT would comment on much of the story, after all (although we’ve reached out to them for comment). So we should take all of this with a grain of salt. And of course, it has been my experience that if you dig into most large organisations you’ll find the occasional bit of dodgy behaviour going on.

    However, if Warren’s testimony is accurate, then the story does paint a pretty disturbing picture of AFACT. From extrapolating busts into headline-grabbing piracy statistics, to courting the police and manipulating the media, I personally felt a little uncomfortable reading Warren’s account of the organisation. Is this the sort of organisation which should be negotiating with the Federal Government behind closed doors on the issue of online copyright infringement?


    Update: Delimiter has received the following statement from AFACT, attributable to executive director Neil Gane:

    AFACT rejects the claims made by Mr Warren who worked for AFACT as a sub contracted Private Investigator for three and a half years and who only makes these allegations after his services were no longer required. Independent and globally recognised researchers IPSOS & Oxford Economics have calculated the loss to the Australian movie industry as a result of movie theft. They are the ones qualified to gather statistics and to comment on their robustness – not disgruntled former employees.

    The IPSOS & Oxford Economics report entitled “Economic Consequences of Movie Piracy” can be found here (PDF).

    Image credit: Mateusz Stachowski, royalty free

    submit to reddit


    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

    1. Anon
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 10:55 am | Permalink | Reply

      Nice journalism. Did you even ask AFACT for a comment?

      • Posted 04/10/2011 at 11:30 am | Permalink | Reply

        It’s a blog post linked to someone else’s story. I don’t usually ask for a comment when I do that — that would have been TorrentFreak’s responsibility. Furthermore, is is quite rare for AFACT to comment in general unless it’s after one of their press releases etc.

    2. Marlon
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 11:56 am | Permalink | Reply

      ““We discussed the formula for extrapolating the potential street value earnings of ‘laboratories’ and we were instructed to count all blank discs in our seizure figures as they were potential product. Mr Gane also explained that the increased loss approximation figures were derived from all forms of impacts on decreasing cinema patronage right through to the farmer who grows the corn for popping.”


      • Anonymous
        Posted 04/10/2011 at 5:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

        Yeah the RIAA and MPAA do the same thing, they go onto torrents sites and say 50,000 downloads of something X the original cost of the product at time of release = the amount lost, they do that even if the product was released 30 years ago.

        That is starting to come up in the US court cases, because something released 30 years ago doesn’t cost the same as it would today, most young kids today couldn’t careless if led zeppelin was a big time band they just wouldn’t buy it today but they might pirate it for their dad or mum, so people are now starting to question, if that would be a sale or not.

        So the figures don’t really add up too much as many people might download something but after that never do anything more with it.

        I’ve bought games at release and never used them up to 3 years later, if I had downloaded that game the same thing would probably happen again.

        • Captain_stabbin
          Posted 05/10/2011 at 8:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

          i don’t watch a fraction of the movies I download, i skim through quick to see if they are worth it first. And i have also been known to download old songs i have on cd rather than make the effort to find it amoung my collection

    3. Guest
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 12:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

      never hurts to ask though… a bit more balance, accuracy and fairness in your anti-copyright articles wouldn’t go astray.

      Even if tru there’s hardly even a story here – when faced with the decision to estimate, AFACT oversestimated rather than underestimated.

      The police do the same with illegal substances, private organisations do the same if it evisaged that it will result in some commercial advantage. It’s no different to the pro-piracy lobby groups saying that piracy results in more money for copyright owners.

      • Posted 04/10/2011 at 12:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

        OK, your nagging has worked, I gave AFACT a call for comment. Their spokesperson was out of the office, but he’ll be back in about an hour and a half and may comment then. You nagging bastard ;)

    4. Anonymous
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 12:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

      there have been other articles like this. Like a year or two ago AFACT claimed they busted a huge commercial piracy operation in Eastwood NSW. It turned out these “pirates” were producing material under licence.

      Of course AFACT made it sound like hundreds of thousands of pirated films were stopped from reaching the black market market. Overblown stats etc etc.

      of course the obtuse bastards only returned the confiscated material was returned after much cost and hassle.

    5. Piratepete
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 12:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      has no one from afact ever been to bali ? it blows my mind that i can come back form bali with a suitcase full of dvds brought from shops open to busy streets yet they spend so much time trying to get rid of piracy at the last step … its like locking up drug users and expecting the cartels to just give up O_o

      • Clinton O'Hara
        Posted 04/10/2011 at 1:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

        that’s because the bottom of the food chain is easier to attack than the top.

      • Anonymous
        Posted 04/10/2011 at 5:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

        The people in bali have no money therefore don’t bother with them.

        The people in Australia do,so you can sue people and expect a return on suing.

        They jail the drug users because they hope the lower sales will reduce the cartel money yet it never has nor never will I think this year or next drugs will be the highest money producing product you can make, it’s only behind guns and guns have only held steady where as drug sales have always gone up.

    6. Me.
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 3:23 pm | Permalink | Reply


      Maybe if they actually made decent movies, people would buy them (I won’t fork out money for a shit movie, and if I ever obtain a non-purchased copy of a movie I like, I will buy it. Unfortunately, the amount of decent movies out these days are more close to 1 per year)

    7. Justin
      Posted 04/10/2011 at 6:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Wasn’t that report debunked the moment it came out because they’d just taken a UK report and substituted Australia for UK? In addition, the original report they copied was also debunked for grossly inflating the impact.

    8. Posted 05/10/2011 at 8:36 am | Permalink | Reply

      “They are the ones qualified to gather statistics and to comment on their robustness – not disgruntled former employees.”

      And of course, there wouldn’t be any “uncoloured” reason AFACT would want to vouch for the “robustness” of these statistics, would there?


    9. Posted 05/10/2011 at 10:01 am | Permalink | Reply

      AFACT’s statement glosses over the fact that a “sub-contracted” employee is an employee nonetheless, and clearly in this case one who was intimately involved in their dirty work before online piracy became their cause célèbre. I don’t think it’s a big call to “extrapolate” AFACT’s current operations from those of Warren’s day.

    10. Harquebus
      Posted 05/10/2011 at 1:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The gummint will go along, they’ve got nothin’ to lose. Definitely not votes anyway.

    11. Diss
      Posted 06/10/2011 at 11:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Boycott Hollywood and vote Pirate Party.

    Leave a Comment


  • Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:

    Follow us on social media

    Use your RSS reader to subscribe to our articles feed or to our comments feed.

  • Most Popular Content

  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT

    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications

    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry

    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights