AFACT had appealed the ruling of the Full Bench of the Federal Court on six grounds, but AFACT will only be heard on five of those grounds. The six grounds were:
- The Full Court had erred in holding that iiNet had not authorised user copyright infringements;
- The Full Court had erred by failing to apply the principles stated in the 1975 Moorhouse copyright ruling, which found that the University of New South Wales had authorised copyright infringement of books in its library by providing a photocopier to let students make copies;
- Given the facts of the case, the Full Court should have found that iiNet authorised copyright infringement;
- The Federal Court judges erred in considering whether iiNet had sufficient knowledge of copyright infringement;
- Justice Arthur Emmett erred in his judgment that AFACT would have to provide iiNet with "unequivocal and cogent evidence" of copyright infringement before it could act on it; and
- That Justice John Nicholas had erred in holding that iiNet's conduct did not constitute "countenancing" of copyright infringement in accordance with the Moorhouse case.
Ground 3 will not be heard, as the court ruled that this ground was addressed by the other grounds of the appeal.http://www.zdnet.com.au/afact-wins-iinet-high-court-hearing-339320303.htm