But in a win for iiNet and the other Australian ISPs, Justice Perram ordered that any letters sent to alleged illicit pirates must first be seen by him before they are sent. He said this would "prevent speculative invoicing", which may not be permitted under Australian law. The judge also ordered that the privacy of individuals should be protected, meaning the rights holder, Dallas Buyers Club LLC, cannot disclose the identities of alleged pirates. In addition to iiNet, ISPs Dodo, Internode, Amnet Broadband, Adam Internet and Wideband Networks will also be required to hand over customer details. It was unclear on Tuesday whether iiNet and the other ISPs would appeal the decision before the Full Court of the Federal Court. They will have 28 days to do so. Erin Turner, campaigns manager at consumer group CHOICE, said "we are in new legal territory" and "we haven't even seen a legal case where a rights holder has taken someone to court for illegally downloading a song or a movie".

Ms Turner said "what's great about this case is that internet service provider iiNet and several others have stood up to an aggressive rights holder" and made Dallas Buyers Club "fight" to access account holders' details. She warned that under a new industry code to tackle online piracy, to be lodged with the government on Wednesday, "that fight is unlikely to happen" and getting access to customer details "might be much more of a rubber-stamping process". "There are requirements [under the code] that ISPs have to co-operate with rights holders," she said. "At least under the current situation, a judge is able to say, 'send stuff to me first.' It puts at least some protections around what gets sent out." The details to be handed over include names and residential addresses of those whose connections were allegedly used to share the film. During the case, Michael Wickstrom, vice president of royalties and music administration at Voltage Pictures, the parent company of Dallas Buyers Club LLC, said the company would not sue or attempt settlement with an autistic child, people who were handicapped, welfare cases, or people who have mental issues.

iiNet argued in court that customers could be incorrectly identified as alleged infringers if details of the account holder were revealed. For example, the relevant IP address could have originated from a person in a shared household where someone other than the account holder infringed copyright. iiNet also argued it wanted to fight the matter because Australian courts had never tested a case like this one before. Justice Perram foreshadowed he would order that Dallas Buyers Club pay the ISPs' legal costs, as well as the costs of searching for documents identifying alleged pirates. Marque Lawyers managing partner Michael Bradley, who acts for Dallas Buyers Club, said outside court that "Australia is one of the jurisdictions with the highest rate of unauthorised downloading and this is a first step from a copyright owner to try to change that balance". iiNet chief David Buckingham said in a statement he was pleased with the result and some of the protections the judge put in place for consumers, despite the fact they can still be identified and sued as a result of the judgment.

"By going through the process we've been able to ensure that our customers will be treated fairly and won't be subjected to the bullying that we have seen happen elsewhere," Mr Buckingham said. Associate Professor Matthew Rimmer, an intellectual property law expert at the Australian National University, said the judgment would trigger a "mini boom for IP [intellectual property] lawyers in Australia". He said people who received letters from Dallas Buyers Club's lawyers should seek legal advice because "Australian copyright law is not easily understood" and the decision raised a "complex web of issues".