*** eircom and Internet Censoring ***

Deleted User wrote: »

Evil Monkey, I like your sig. May i shamelessly steal it?

Yeah go ahead! :cool:


http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l175/_EvilMonkey_/blackout_sig1.png

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l175/_EvilMonkey_/blackout_sig.png

bobbbb wrote: »

You could start one.

Once Eircom start to lose customers by the thousand they'll back down.
They only ones who will stay will be those who know how to use proxies.

A nice theory, but unfortunately even in towns it not an option, In Wexford there are two exchanges people on the old one, barring the County Council have to go to great lengths to get a fix and the newer Exchange is inadequate to it's task. Until the 'competition' put down viable independent communication systems there aren't competitors perhaps Dublin and Cork being the exception. (Wireless, satellite, mobile access are not viable and Optic fibre access is prohibitively expensive)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt'n Midnight
*broken record*
If you move to another ADSL provider eircom still get line rental and wholesale rate. Eircom loose problem customers so it's win-win for them

bobbbb wrote: »

If that was the case Eircom wouldnt be in the broadband business. They would only be in the line rental business

Eircom have that covered- they won't fix lines being used by other service providers easily. In 15 years I've heard of only one direct account where a line rented to a customer by another provider was damaged and fixed by eircom. I E if you're not an eircom customer they won't fix your line and take years to fix it if you are their customer.

If the record companies believe a person has pirated more material than they have contributed to the fund then they can warn the person that they are aware of this and then proceed to take them to court for the money after giving the person enough time to pay up if they agree that they were in the wrong.

To do that they would have to monitor what you download? Are you really happy to give over that much freedom to some executive in IRMA?

It's not the job of the ISPs or the music companies to decide which website we are allowed use and which ones are banned. Child pornography sites are an obvious exception but that is a matter for the gardai.

I rarely use torrents, I pay a fee for newgroups. All the same I'd be more than happy to pay a fee for an all you can eat service of music and tv.

The music and film companies need to realise that the old way of controling what films and track are sold in which countries and for how much is rapidly becoming redundant.

Going after your customer and treating them as the enemy didn't really work for the music companies a few years ago. And it will hurt the ISPs even more if they start dictating, on IRMA's behalf, to their own customers.

I would switch to which ever ISP goes against IRMA. Failing that I would find some technical way of subverting any attempt to block my access to Pirate Bay et al. And not because I am keen to download music (I rarely even use PirateBay), but because what they are doing is wrong and akin to book burnings.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS+FEATURES-qqqm=nav-qqqid=39945-qqqx=1.asp

Internet ‘death penalties’ unacceptable
Sunday, March 01, 2009
A private deal between the music industry and Eircom could lead to innocent internet users being denied access, writes TJ McIntyre.

Banning someone from internet use is a draconian punishment.

In an era where internet access is increasingly essential - whether to send an e-mail, look for a job or book a flight - to deprive a person of this basic right is seriously to disrupt their daily life.

In fact, an internet ban is such a serious sanction that the Irish courts have only ever imposed it in extreme cases involving child pornography.

Yet in a private deal between Eircom and the music industry - a deal which the music industry is now trying to force on other Irish internet service providers (ISPs) - internet bans may become commonplace.




The deal has been called “three strikes and you’re out”, but it might better be called “three accusations and you’re out” - as there would be no trial, no evidence held up to court scrutiny and no right of appeal for convicted users.

Instead, once the music industry makes three allegations that a particular internet user is sharing music, Eircom will disconnect that user, applying what’s often called an internet ‘death penalty’.

What might this deal mean for the internet in Ireland? We can certainly expect users to be wrongfully accused. The company that the music industry previously used to identify filesharers - MediaSentry - has a questionable track record, and was recently found to be operating illegally in several US states.

The music industry has recently turned to Danish firm Dtecnet - though the inherent unreliability of this process may remain.

But there is also the issue of people being falsely accused - because someone else could use a wireless modem connection if its password was insecure.

This means that a neighbour or passerby could use broadband without permission. Should they face an internet ban for the actions of somebody piggybacking on their wireless?

This reflects a broader problem, where innocent third parties will be affected. Internet connections are not generally unique to an individual. Instead they’re shared - among families and flatmates, for example. But three accusations will mean the connection will be shut off for every user, so others will suffer based on the alleged wrongdoing of another. The deal is also undemocratic.

The European Parliament recently rejected a scheme to disconnect users based on mere accusations. In Britain, similar proposals were ultimately rejected after public consultations and open debate. Here, however, the music industry is trying to foist this system on ISPs in a private deal, while bypassing scrutiny by the Oireachtas and the Department of Communications.

In another part of this deal, as well as disconnecting users, the music industry also wants Irish ISPs to impose a second type of internet death penalty, by preventing Irish users from reading certain websites. This time there is pretence of legal cover, in that the obligation would be to block websites only where a court order is granted - but the music industry has threatened to sue any ISP that opposes such an order, meaning that any court will hear only one side of the story.

The result, if this scheme is allowed to proceed, will be to make ISPs responsible for censoring what their users can view on the internet.

If this precedent is set for the music industry, expect others to follow soon after.

The publishing industry, for example, might target Google’s Book Search project which, it has claimed, infringes copyright.

The Church of Scientology already has a track record of trying to silence criticism by claiming that its copyright is infringed by certain sites. Diebold - a US manufacturer of electronic voting machines - was found guilty by the US courts of abusing copyright law to shut down internet sites, in order to conceal flaws in its technology.

If Irish ISPs become internet censors, then similar plaintiffs can be expected to try their luck here.

Quite apart from civil liberties concerns, there are also commercial costs. If this deal is allowed to proceed, it will harm Ireland’s reputation as an internet-friendly country.

Requiring companies to police the actions of their users and censor what users can see - a duty which they are not subject to in other jurisdictions, such as the United States - will drive up costs (for both company and user), harm inward investment and encourage technology firms to relocate.

In short, this deal is an unacceptable threat to Irish internet users and businesses. Fortunately, so far only Eircom has signed up. Other ISPs are still considering whether to cave in to the threats of the music industry.

There is still time for them to do the right thing - and say no to a privatised internet death penalty.

TJ McIntyre is a solicitor, lecturer in law in University College Dublin and chairman of Digital Rights Ireland.

For anyone who is curious about the legal position Eircom should have taken on this:

(43) A service provider can benefit from the exemptions for "mere conduit" and for "caching" when he is in no way involved with the information transmitted; this requires among other things that he does not modify the information that he transmits; this requirement does not cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission as they do not alter the integrity of the information contained in the transmission.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0031:EN:NOT

More info on what Eircom plans to do here: http://andyaz.ie/blackout-ireland-some-questions/

My favourite bit:

Germany’s Secretary of Justice Brigitte Zypries had this to say:

“I don’t think that (Three Strikes) is a fitting model for Germany or even Europe. Preventing someone from accessing the Internet seems like a completely unreasonable punishment to me. It would be highly problematic due to both constitutional and political aspects.”