As the appeal case between the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) and ISP iiNet entered day one, the film industry's lead barrister David Catterns QC submitted that the Copyright Act allowed the studios to sue an alleged "authoriser" of the infringing activity rather than the "primary infringer" - the individual users.    From Wordnik.com.  [iTnews Australia] Reference

Thus, even delinquents, who would otherwise be sacrificed voluntarily to public justice, are in a manner protected by delays and chicane, because an investigation might implicate the Convention as the example and authoriser of their enormities.    From Wordnik.com.  [A Residence in France During the Years 1792, 1793, 1794 and 1795, Complete Described in a Series of Letters from an English Lady: with General and Incidental Remarks on the French Character and Manners] Reference

Rather than having to sue them, the Act under section 101 enables you to sue the authoriser.    From Wordnik.com.  [iTnews Australia] Reference

The concept of authorisation is sufficiently fuzzy that the question of whether the alleged authoriser 'ought' to be held responsible is a real and relevant question.    From Wordnik.com.  [LawFont.com] Reference

Thus, even delinquents, who would otherwise be sacrificed voluntarily to public justice, are in a manner protected by delays and chicane, because an investigation might implicate the Convention as the example and authoriser of their enormities. ”.    From Wordnik.com.  [A Residence in France During the Years 1792 1793 1794 and 1795]