IF you’ve downloaded the film Dallas Buyers Club illegally, could you be hit with a $9000 fine?

That’s the average amount rights holders have tried to extract from illegal downloaders internationally, and after yesterday’s Federal Court ruling, there are around 4,700 Australians who could be feeling pretty nervous.

The landmark case between internet service provider iiNet and the rights holders of the award-winning film is tipped to have long lasting implications for the ongoing fight against illegal downloading.

Yesterday’s decision requires iiNet and other ISPs to divulge the identity and personal details of customers whose IP address was found to have shared the film Dallas Buyers Club illegally.

The ruling means that the company will now be given the contact details of the offenders, and will be able to pursue them directly for compensation. It also means more than a few Australian internet users will probably be nervously checking their mailboxes in the next few weeks.

ISPs have 28 days to appeal Federal Court Justice Nye Perram’s decision, but in the event it does go ahead, we’ve asked the experts exactly what to do if you do receive a bill.

Justice Perram says "preliminary discovery" of iiNet customer details should be granted in case against Dallas Buyers Club #iiDallas — Claire Reilly (@reillystyley) April 7, 2015

Australian Federal Court has ruled iiNet must hand over the names & addresses of 4726 customers who illegally downloaded Dallas Buyers Club. — Alice Workman (@workmanalice) April 7, 2015

Intellectual property expert Anny Slater from Slaters Intellectual Property Lawyers tells news.com.au there’s a few steps to be taken before it reaches that stage, anyway.

“If people have downloaded it, they should be cautious that it’s illegal,” she says. “But at the moment it’s a long way away and there’s a lot of steps that (the rights holders of) Dallas Buyers Club would need to meet before anything happened.”

If the ISPs do not appeal the decision, Dallas Buyers Club would be given the power to write to people whose names and addresses they receive, but that correspondence would be monitored by the court to make sure it is “appropriate” and “doesn’t overstate the case”, Ms Slater says.

“The issue is that they don’t have any proof of download,” she says.

“The most that ever happened overseas was that they wrote a letter to alleged infringers and said we consider that we have a case and these are normally the sorts of damages that we’ve been entitled to, but we will consider not taking that step if you pay this amount to us. And so they just nominated the amount.”

“It’s an exercise in encouraging people not to download or share, because the money that they ask for was just a drop in the ocean — it has averaged about $US7000 ($A9100) in the past.”

While that amount might not be a ‘drop in the ocean’ to most people, it’s important to note that letters sent to infringers overseas were not approved by a court before being sent, which will have to happen in Australia.

Malone on metadata laws: "they suck" IiNet's founder slams the newly-passed metadata laws as an affront to citizens' rights.

Dr Michael Fraser, Director of the Communications Law Centre at Sydney’s University of Technology believes it’s unlikely offenders will be hit with a hefty fine, but whatever the consequence it will send a shock through copyright pirates.

“As the judge has asked for those letters to be sent to him in draft form, it’s not possible that there will be excessive demands made in that letter like we’ve seen overseas. It might just be a warning, it might be a demand for the price the film,” he says.

“But whatever it is it will send a strong warning and it does set a precedent. The days of pirating anonymously are over.”

Dr Fraser believes anonymity in the online environment has led to “an unhealthy state of affairs” where people believe they can do things that are illegal online, and Australians are big offenders.

“There’s been a feeling that anonymity will protect you and this case proves that’s no longer the case.”

There is also an important distinction to be made in the torrenting activity of those identified in the case. Former iiNet chief regulatory officer, Steve Dalby, told Fairfax Media it’s those who seeded the torrent (making it available for others to download) that have been identified.

“They can’t detect downloaders so if I downloaded it but never shared it I wouldn’t be concerned about it,” he said.

Yesterday’s verdict was no doubt a win for rights holders and fired a damaging shot across the bow of Australian pirates. But if you receive a letter, it’s important to obtain legal advice says Anny Slater. While a letter is likely to ask for financial compensation, don’t be scared into handing over the cash straight away.

“If they were to receive a letter then they should take it to a solicitor who would advise them what it says and it’s important that (they speak to) someone who is objective (who) can do that.”

If you have downloaded the movie and have concerns, we would love to hear from you.

Please email nicholas.whigham@news.com.au.