DBC LLC was refused access to the account holders' details after Justice Perram took issue with two of its four proposed methods of calculating the amount of damages to be pursued from an individual.
The company had proposed to calculate its claims based on:
the cost of a single copy of the film had it been authentically downloaded;
a claim for an amount based on each person who had accessed the uploaded film;
a claim for punitive damages depending on how many copies of non-DBC copyrighted works had been downloaded by each infringer;
and a claim for damages relating to the costs of obtaining to user's details.
Justice Perram said while he had no issue with claiming for a single legitimate copy of the film and for damages relating to costs in obtaining the account holder's details, the other two claims were "untenable".
DBC LLC had also previously revealed it had planned to ask alleged copyright violators for details of their annual salaries and online file sharing activities to determine the size of the penalty to be charged for claimed infringement.
The company had 14 days from the August ruling to submit an appeal, but decided to let last Friday's deadline pass.
Michael Bradley, managing director of the law firm representing DBC LLC, Marque Lawyers, told iTnews the company had decided not to appeal the decision based on the cost and risk involved.
"Appeals are always hard, it's an expensive course, and it's unpredictable - if one judge has taken a particular view, you're taking a gamble on whether three other judges are going to take a different view," he said.
"We think there may be another way of achieving the outcome [we want] without having to go through an appeal."
DBC LLC plans to rework its proposed methodology for damages and resubmit it to the court to be able to access the account holder details it is seeking.http://www.itnews.com.au/news/dbc-opts-against-appeal-in-iinet-piracy-ruling-408793