[Article] Eircom to cut off Music File Sharers ..

thomashood10

In my opinion guys,

IF eircom are dealing with the companies directly it's just flat out illegal according to the Data Protection Act:

"6. Right to prevent use of your personal details

You can also ask a data controller not to use your personal details for purposes other than their main purpose – for example for marketing.

You can do this by simply writing to the organisation or person holding your details and outlining your views. Within 40 days, they must do as you ask or explain why they will not do so."

Asides from this;

(techies correct me if I'm wrong)

but the IP address that is given away by limewire/torrent sharing programs doesn't locate your computer specifically at all. Now as I said correct me if I'm wrong but it should only locate you to within a certain area. It's hardly pinpoint.

And as people have mentioned proxy/use the right programs and you'll be fine.

As for the ethics of it all; as long as the artist is fine with it I'm fine with it.

I refuse to pay upto 20-25 euros for a piece of plastic. considering how much tapes are worth now, it's just greed. I appreciate even the record companies need to make money, but cmon look at the price of a stack of blank CD's and compare them to any album/single.

It's like asking me to pay 5 euro extra for a pen because it shoots special pink ink that glows.

smellslikeshoes

I personally don't think much of peerguardian to be honest, there is no way their blocked IP lists could ever do more than block the tip of the iceberg.

donmaga1

Try using http://hotspotshield.com/. It gives you an ip in the states I use it to watch tv programs on hulu.com. Which you can only get in the states

jor el

thomashood10 wrote: »

In my opinion guys,

IF eircom are dealing with the companies directly it's just flat out illegal according to the Data Protection Act

No, they are not. Please read the thread again, and understand it this time.

eircom are NOT giving any of your personal information, or details, to ANYONE

thomashood10 wrote: »

but the IP address that is given away by limewire/torrent sharing programs doesn't locate your computer specifically at all. Now as I said correct me if I'm wrong but it should only locate you to within a certain area. It's hardly pinpoint.

Your IP address is assigned by your ISP, not the file sharing network. All eircom needs is an IP and the date and time, and they know EXACTLY who it was.

thomashood10 wrote: »

And as people have mentioned proxy/use the right programs and you'll be fine.

There really is no way to secure yourself on a file sharing network, as you are after all, sharing files. If you were invisible or untraceable, it wouldn't work.

thomashood10 wrote: »

I refuse to pay upto 20-25 euros for a piece of plastic. considering how much tapes are worth now, it's just greed. I appreciate even the record companies need to make money, but cmon look at the price of a stack of blank CD's and compare them to any album/single.

Albums can be bought online for as little as €10-15 for new releases, less for older ones. Anyone paying €25 for an album needs their head read. Legally downloaded music is still way over priced, and it needs to be dramatically dropped if they want to stem the illegal music sharing.

The price of music is not based on the cost of manufacturing the CD, you're paying for the right to listen to the music itself. The cost of the CD, and distribution, is a tiny portion of the final price.

Music CDs can be very reasonably priced, downloadable music is, in all cases, way over priced.

jor el

Warning to all

People mentioning warez sites, or illegal downloading sites, are being, and will be banned. This thread is not a free-for-all on naming all the places you can download files without having to use P2P.

For those mentioning anonymising proxies, and so on, that's OK, but know that these will most likely not help to anonymise you on the P2P networks.

KoKane

Someone mentioned Entrapment 2 pages ago...

Forgottenone

Scram wrote: »

I used to always use that on XP but i cant it to work on Vista 64:(

ya you can i do anyway you need to do this

• Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> Right click Command Prompt -> Run as administrator.
• Copy the following exactly (without quotes): "bcdedit /set loadoptions DDISABLE_INTEGRITY_CHECKS". Right click on the title bar, go to Edit -> Paste. Make sure what was pasted is correct, then hit enter to execute the command.
• Reboot the machine
• Now the first time you load PeerGuardian you will see a message like windows requires digitally signed drivers, If you performed the above steps correctly, it is safe to ignore this. You can make sure by turning on Show Allowed under settings, and making sure an IP scrolls by when you visit a website.
• you also need this well i did anyway

http://www.citadel.co.nr/readydriverplus/

thomashood10

jor el wrote: »

No, they are not. Please read the thread again, and understand it this time.

eircom are NOT giving any of your personal information, or details, to ANYONE




Your IP address is assigned by your ISP, not the file sharing network. All eircom needs is an IP and the date and time, and they know EXACTLY who it was.



There really is no way to secure yourself on a file sharing network, as you are after all, sharing files. If you were invisible or untraceable, it wouldn't work.



Albums can be bought online for as little as €10-15 for new releases, less for older ones. Anyone paying €25 for an album needs their head read. Legally downloaded music is still way over priced, and it needs to be dramatically dropped if they want to stem the illegal music sharing.

The price of music is not based on the cost of manufacturing the CD, you're paying for the right to listen to the music itself. The cost of the CD, and distribution, is a tiny portion of the final price.

Music CDs can be very reasonably priced, downloadable music is, in all cases, way over priced.

Ahh yes I see your first point, they're just blocking you on their terms. Fair point.

Em I know I said techies correct me and all that, but I was being.. whats the word.. (i really dunno) rhetorical?

If the record companies have a list of IP addresses, then they are useless. The IP address that "locates" you on the internet is just a network gateway for your local area. Don't argue this with me, it's fact.

So the only way for this **** to work is if eircom tracked us themselves and handed out the warnings. Now frankly, eircom don't have keyloggers/trojans installed on my PC. I'm pretty confident of that. So all they can do really is monitor the volume of traffic.

Yes ok they could use a packet sniffer, and actually watch all the info come in over the network. But the info would be far too raw, and there'd be way too much volume. Asides from that, I'm sure there'd be a few privacy laws they'd be trampling, as they'd see all our emails etc.

If if they had an ISP only program that allowed them to sniff individual PCs within a network. The man hours needed to monitor and sift through it all would be ridiculous.

I believe Hotspot shield was mentioned, the program is very good. And frankly Limewire/most programs display whatever address is coming through the port at their end, which is gonna be the info the music companies get.

As for paying for the right to listen to the music. The buskers on grafton street are usually just happy your listening. But I agree, you should pay for it, I usually drop them a 2 euro coin. Plus it's live.

BoB_BoT

I'm twitching a little bit when I see responses like "Sure that company only produces ****e music" or "It's 25euro for a cd", please show me some examples of the 25euro cds. Because the last couple of albums I've bought have all been under 15 and one of them was a 2 disk special edition! With the argument the music is ****e, I'm not paying for it, why the hell would you download it then?

If someone produces something, they charge X amount for it. You pay that price, or you don't. Ethically you're wrong, simple as. I'm not going to say I've never downloaded stuff, I have, but I've also bought plenty of cds dvds and software. If someone slaps me on the wrist for what I've done, it's to be expected.

With regards to eircom, they've only agreed to give said slap or reminder. They haven't agreed to put equipment into their exchanges or premises to monitor IPs or data to aid the companies in question. In fact eircom will probably have to open a disputes department for this, for people who feel they've wrongly been accused or if they believe someone else did it on their connection. In fact, it'd be a good area for eircom to open a department for "securing" connections and make some extra money off it.

Overall they don't have to put equipment into place, it won't need to be maintained, they won't be breaching any current laws etc... At most they've a few extra letters to send out.

If you download stuff that isn't yours, and you get caught, tough ****, take it standing up and either change ISP or move to a country without copyright laws.

Meh

dub45

jor el wrote: »

Albums can be bought online for as little as €10-15 for new releases, less for older ones. Anyone paying €25 for an album needs their head read. Legally downloaded music is still way over priced, and it needs to be dramatically dropped if they want to stem the illegal music sharing.

The price of music is not based on the cost of manufacturing the CD, you're paying for the right to listen to the music itself. The cost of the CD, and distribution, is a tiny portion of the final price.

Music CDs can be very reasonably priced, downloadable music is, in all cases, way over priced.

There is also the not inconsiderable cost of recording the music, payment to musicians etc etc.

It is a long time now since any new cd cost 25 euros.:rolleyes:

thomashood10

dub45 wrote: »

There is also the not inconsiderable cost of recording the music, payment to musicians etc etc.

It is a long time now since any new cd cost 25 euros.:rolleyes:

I worked in Virgin/Zavvi dundrum. (while Virgin were changing to Zavvi to be precise)

The amount of people that have looked at me cock eyed over the price of a dvd/cd. Yes sales are on now ofcourse. But I've dealt with plenty of angry women/men/kids who've tried to put a price over a sticker or just flat out think it's insane the price.

edit: to give an example, my friend bought chinese democracy in there for 20 quid when it came out. Now yes ok, it's come down etc. Not as expensive now.

But tbh, if there wasn't a recession and things were still booming, if piracy wasn't a problem, we'd be getting ripped off.

java

thomashood10 wrote: »

If the record companies have a list of IP addresses, then they are useless. The IP address that "locates" you on the internet is just a network gateway for your local area. Don't argue this with me, it's fact.

Bull****. Your ISP, whomever they may be, knows who has an ip address at any given time. ISP's keep tonnes of logs. Thats FACT.

thomashood10 wrote: »

So the only way for this **** to work is if eircom tracked us themselves and handed out the warnings. Now frankly, eircom don't have keyloggers/trojans installed on my PC. I'm pretty confident of that. So all they can do really is monitor the volume of traffic.

If you read any of the posts, you'd understand that eircom will not be doing the tracking.

thomashood10

java wrote: »

Bull****. Your ISP, whomever they may be, knows who has an ip address at any given time. ISP's keep tonnes of logs. Thats FACT.



If you read any of the posts, you'd understand that eircom will not be doing the tracking.

Yeh the record companies will be, that's my point. And the record companies will be handing those IP's to Eircom. Those IP's will NOT pinpoint your PC within a network.

edit: http://whatismyipaddress.com/

Zoom all the way in, this is how close those recording companies are going to get to you.

Apparently I'm located in the middle of a river.

gg

BoB_BoT

thomashood10 wrote: »

I worked in Virgin/Zavvi dundrum. (while Virgin were changing to Zavvi to be precise)

The amount of people that have looked at me cock eyed over the price of a dvd/cd. Yes sales are on now ofcourse. But I've dealt with plenty of angry women/men/kids who've tried to put a price over a sticker or just flat out think it's insane the price.

edit: to give an example, my friend bought chinese democracy in there for 20 quid when it came out. Now yes ok, it's come down etc. Not as expensive now.

But tbh, if there wasn't a recession and things were still booming, if piracy wasn't a problem, we'd be getting ripped off.

If people don't like the prices of things, they should stop buying the item. Believe it or not, music is a luxury not a necessity. If bread was 5 euro a loaf and you can't afford it, then yeah, start stealing that!

If people were willing to put up with 20euro for a new release, then fine, but otherwise nothing happens. People keep buying, I decided to buy online if I can't get something at a reasonable price locally. If it's too expensive, I don't buy. Simple as.
Your friend was ripped off regardless, taking one new release, Bruce Springsteen - Working On A Dream, 11.99 euro. Nowhere near 20, (from play.com) Hmvs site is selling it at 8.99pound (even cheaper).

I won't deny that yes, we were being ripped off, but we allowed ourselves and this just isn't with music and video, it's a hell of a lot other things but that's probably best for the ROI or Consumer Issues forum.

FruitLover

aidanodr wrote: »

"The ruling means a precedent has been set

It's a settlement (i.e. an agreement), not a ruling. There has been no legal precedent set. I would recommend you make sure to get your facts straight (and read things carefully) before flying off the handle in future, to avoid looking like a ninny.

niceirishfella wrote: »

more nanny state sh1te

It's nanny eircom, it's got nothing to do with the state. If eircom want to kick you off their service for warezing, there's nothing to stop you changing to another ISP and downloading whatever you want.

java

thomashood10 wrote: »

Yeh the record companies will be, that's my point. And the record companies will be handing those IP's to Eircom. Those IP's will NOT pinpoint your PC within a network.

edit: http://whatismyipaddress.com/

Zoom all the way in, this is how close those recording companies are going to get to you.

Apparently I'm located in the middle of a river.

gg

Thats because google maps uses geo lookups based on the Ripe database. Don't be fooled into thinking just because google maps says your ip is in a river, that your ISP thinks the same! Your ISP knows exactly who has an ip at any given time.

Blazer

tbh it's much better getting a warning from Eircom than threatening legal letters from the music gimps.
I reckon Eircom was very smart in settling this.
Knowing the stupid laws in this country a judge could easily have told Eircom to track all user stats etc and disconnect them asap as well as inform the record companies. Last thing I want Eircom to check is why the hell am I downloading 200GBs of stuff every month and what is it?
Now all Eircom have to do is to pretend to give a fcuk when the record labels coming whining so and so is downloading our music.
Eircom fire off a warning letter and the record companies are happy.
Except for the person who's still downloading via torrent etc.
Anyway stuff like this is always circumvented.

BoB_BoT

thomashood10 wrote: »

Yeh the record companies will be, that's my point. And the record companies will be handing those IP's to Eircom. Those IP's will NOT pinpoint your PC within a network.

edit: http://whatismyipaddress.com/

Zoom all the way in, this is how close those recording companies are going to get to you.

Apparently I'm located in the middle of a river.

gg

IP and exact time can track you down pretty close enough on the likes of Eircoms databases. All they have to do is cross reference it with their logs and bam, they've got what REGISTERED CUSTOMER the connection belongs to. Spoofing IPS will circumvent a lot of that, but your average p2p program users doesn't even know they have virus or spyware on their machine. Trust me on this, I see so many computers with one particular p2p software, no antivirus (or if they do it's not functioning or expired), no windows updates etc....

As pointed out already, with torrents, the companies can simply join them and they've got access to all the persons seeding and leeching. If your IP is not masked they've got enough to send on a report to eircom.

dub45

thomashood10 wrote: »

I worked in Virgin/Zavvi dundrum. (while Virgin were changing to Zavvi to be precise)

The amount of people that have looked at me cock eyed over the price of a dvd/cd. Yes sales are on now ofcourse. But I've dealt with plenty of angry women/men/kids who've tried to put a price over a sticker or just flat out think it's insane the price.

edit: to give an example, my friend bought chinese democracy in there for 20 quid when it came out. Now yes ok, it's come down etc. Not as expensive now.

But tbh, if there wasn't a recession and things were still booming, if piracy wasn't a problem, we'd be getting ripped off.

Getting ripped off is obviously relative - people on the one hand complain about the price of a cd - which in most cases they wildly exaggerate - blame the record companies for producing lousy music, which of course they are under absolutely no obligation to buy and then without any irony or conscience proceed to download it by the ton, without feeling any obligation to the people who produce it - not just the 'fat cats' of the record companies who are easy targets but the musicians, composers, studio owners, engineers, record shop owners, small label owners and so on who are deeply committed to the music in their own particular way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/16/fashion/sundaystyles/16store.html?scp=14&sq=record%20shops&st=cse

Jev/N

jor el wrote: »

eircom will know who's doing what, but they will not be passing this information, or any subscriber details, on to the record companies. The record companies may be able to see the same IP coming up time and again, but because of eircom's DHCP servers, the IPs won't necessarily be from the same person each time. There is no visibility to who is actually sharing the music, from the record companies point of view.

Yeh I know, I was just explaining to the poster that DHCP doesn't completely make it impossible to find who was using the IP for downloading music if Eircom did pass on the info, which as the report states they're not doing... I have to qualify that statement by saying "yet", as while the Data Protection Act is there, and all well and good, it can always be found that there is a so called "ranking" of rights and responsibilities and possibly breach of your responsibility to refrain from pirating music may negate your right to your information not being shared

thomashood10

I would agree.

But thats why I really don't feel to guilty about pirating things. Ripping people off is as bad as stealing in my opinion.

For example;

Stalker Clear Sky.

Bought the standard edition when it came out for 50 euro.

More bugs then god knows what. Had to reinstall it countless times, and at one stage it looked like I couldn't play it period due to a bug.

Now in my opinion it's a justifiable pirate. The game has a good chance of not working at all.

I would reckon most people don't think about this though, and just pirate it anyway.

But as far as I go, I do have certain things which I make a point of buying.

EDIT: as far as the DHCP servers, we have no idea how they're mapped, there could be sub-networks for different areas etc. Frankly if you ask me, considering the average download speed on broadband, i'm probably sharing the line with upto 50 different users. I'd say worst case scenario is, Eircom can narrow it down to 20 people before they start looking at where individual packets are going to what machine.

AlmightyCushion

thomashood10 wrote: »

Yeh the record companies will be, that's my point. And the record companies will be handing those IP's to Eircom. Those IP's will NOT pinpoint your PC within a network.

edit: http://whatismyipaddress.com/

Zoom all the way in, this is how close those recording companies are going to get to you.

Apparently I'm located in the middle of a river.

gg

It puts me in the middle of a river too. How do the record companies know about my super secret under water base?????

Jev/N

FruitLover wrote: »

It's a settlement (i.e. an agreement), not a ruling. There has been no legal precedent set. I would recommend you make sure to get your facts straight (and read things carefully) before flying off the handle in future, to avoid looking like a ninny.

Thank god someone set the poster straight :rolleyes:

And if there was a ruling, precedent need not be followed anyways

BoB_BoT

thomashood10 wrote: »

I would agree.

But thats why I really don't feel to guilty about pirating things. Ripping people off is as bad as stealing in my opinion.

For example;

Stalker Clear Sky.

Bought the standard edition when it came out for 50 euro.

More bugs then god knows what. Had to reinstall it countless times, and at one stage it looked like I couldn't play it period due to a bug.

Now in my opinion it's a justifiable pirate. The game has a good chance of not working at all.

I would reckon most people don't think about this though, and just pirate it anyway.

But as far as I go, I do have certain things which I make a point of buying.

Did you try to contact the company that produces it "game world I think" and ask them for a refund or a working product?

Or at least make it known that you are a disgruntled customer not happy with your product.

It's one thing to see a bad film after paying to see it. If I honestly felt that strongly about it, I'd seek my money back, but not from the Cinema or place I bought it, but from who made it. The shop/cinema did their job in selling it, the fact that I don't like it I'd take my gripe with the company.

I don't download another game/film/song from another company because another companies was crap.

Ripping people off is wrong, but it's not stealing. YOU paid the price, YOU agreed to hand your money over for it. If you were that unhappy you ask for a refund.

PaulBrewer

dub45 wrote: »

Getting ripped off is obviously relative - people on the one hand complain about the price of a cd - which in most cases they wildly exaggerate - blame the record companies for producing lousy music, which of course they are under absolutely no obligation to buy and then without any irony or conscience proceed to download it by the ton, without feeling any obligation to the people who produce it - not just the 'fat cats' of the record companies who are easy targets but the musicians, composers, studio owners, engineers, record shop owners, small label owners and so on who are deeply committed to the music in their own particular way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/16/fashion/sundaystyles/16store.html?scp=14&sq=record%20shops&st=cse

I think if Record Companies were doing ok this would be a half-arsed attempt at getting more cream.

However that isn't the case. Labels are in big trouble, it's now do or die. Things will get dirty.

Wait 'til Apple (the biggest music retailer in the US) or similar get involved in bunging the leaks - that's when the fun will start.

There can be no argument, if you download music that isn't free without paying for it you're a thief.

thomashood10

Yes actually many people have. The game is notoriously buggy, and thousands of other people had the same problem I had.

..but they released it anyway.

I shouldn't have to get a refund. It was a deal between me and them, they gave me the game, I gave them my hard earned cash.

And I'm sorry but being ripped off is just as bad as stealing. Thats just my opinion. It might be dressed up in a pretty box with a bow. But at the end of the day I was ****ed over.

BoB_BoT

thomashood10 wrote: »

Yes actually many people have. The game is notoriously buggy, and thousands of other people had the same problem I had.

..but they released it anyway.

I shouldn't have to get a refund. It was a deal between me and them, they gave me the game, I gave them my hard earned cash.

And I'm sorry but being ripped off is just as bad as stealing. Thats just my opinion. It might be dressed up in a pretty box with a bow. But at the end of the day I was ****ed over.

If something doesn't work the way it should, you get a refund. If the disk didn't work, you'd return it. If it was the wrong product, you'd return it. If the game engine... you see where I'm going here.

Did you personally write/send an email/letter requesting a refund or of complaint?


You're still not getting the whole rip-off thing are you? They're not ducking in front of the counter, opening a door and slipping their hand in your pocket. you WILLINGLY handed over your money. That's the difference.

thomashood10

My point is, on the box it didn't say it wouldn't work due to the hideous errors the game has. I shouldn't have had to get a refund.

Yes I did ofcourse go to their website, and stumble upon the 3 or so patches that came out after the game was released. But they didn't help either. Just gave up on it after a while.

Yes, but I handed it over because I expected a product in return. It's trade. I stand by my principle. Breaking it down to the bone, they took my money and didn't deliver on their end, they broke the deal. So they screwed with me and took my money. For what reason? I don't know.

jos22

The 3 strike approach has already being ruled out by the UK and would not have been possible If the french president didnt viteo a bill.
The European Parliament had voted in favor of an amendment that would prevent member states from implementing three-stikes laws. Disconnecting alleged file-sharers based on evidence from anti-piracy lobby groups restricts the rights and freedoms of Internet users, according to the amendment.
The amendment, drafted by Guy Bono and other members of the European Parliament, was adopted by an overwhelming majority. 573 parliament members voted in favor while only 74 rejected. Satisfied with this outcome, Bono stated in a response to the vote: “You do not play with individual freedoms like that,” and said that the French government should review its three-strikes law.”
The vote was welcomed in other member states as well. Swedish EU parliamentarian Christofer Fjellner said in a comment: “What’s important about this decision is that now it’s clear that you can’t force [internet service] providers to ban people from the Internet without a legal process.”
It is scary to see how lobby groups are awarded powers that should only belong to law-enforcement agencies. Evidence should never be collectedly by parties who gather it in their own interests, and it is a relief to see that the European Parliament agrees on this.

but now all that matters is alleged loss by 4 multi billion dollar records and our freedom are taken away.
opposed this strongly , cancle your eircom accounts home phone and broadband, and boycott Sony BMG, EMI Warner and Universal
the amendmnet can be ready here which would be in place now making the 3 strikes not possible if it was not for the french president.
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_Package_Plenary_Amendments#Amendment_138_.2B.2B.2B


also read

http://www.digitalrights.ie/2008/03/11/irma-v-eircom-why-isp-filtering-for-the-music-industry-is-a-bad-idea/

thomashood10

http://hotspotshield.com/

problem solved guys.