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

sceptre

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0128/download.html

Poor reporting imho

Agreed. Spelling "copyright" with a w as they've done doesn't really help them either.

Jev/N

jos22 wrote: »

and boycott Sony BMG, EMI Warner and Universal[/B]

LOL, isn't that essentially what everyone is doing already!?

jos22

Jev/N wrote: »

LOL, isn't that essentially what everyone is doing already!?

yes but but some idiots still by music
also who actually still uses p2p these days
always good to check
http://www.riaaradar.com/
to check record labels which those scum own

sceptre

galwaytt wrote: »

...what I want to know is, if you're an Eircom customer, how do the music co's get your i.p. address ?

Oh that's easy. If anything too easy. Every time you make a page request or any other request on the Internet, the recipient has your IP address (yes, I realise I'm being simplistic here). They don't have to ask Eircom for it, if they pretend to be another downloader or uploader, your torrent app just gave it to them. Eircom have a particular block of addresses so it's easy to see whether User X who just asked your computer for file Y is an Eircom customer. You can do that at home yourself.

I'm sure the record companies would like a few high profile court cases to scare people off. I'm also sure they quite like this solution - they don't have to go to the trouble of trying to get names and addresses from Eircom based on the IP addresses they hand them. That's hassle, takes time and even Eircom would probably fight every such application for information. This way, they don't have to.

And under Data Protection legislation, what gives Eircom the right to give out your info, without your express permission ?

See above, on my reading of the news story Eircom aren't handing out any info, they're being given the info.

If by 'posing' as a P2P the music co's set about entrapping people, then surely they are guilty of encouraging the behaviour they are giving out about.....

Entrapment is a legal term. What you've described isn't entrapment. You mightn't like their actions, perhaps I don't either but it isn't entrapment. What entrapment is has been confused for most people by inaccurate Hollywood thrillers for the sake of entertainment (nothing wrong with that but it's hardly a course in law 101). Posing as a normal downloader isn't entrapment, it's only entrapment when, say (for example) a police officer encourages you to commit a crime that you would have been unlikely to commit without their encouragement (and even then it's not a universal defence). Record companies aren't police and pretending to have 45kb of the latest Britney Spears album so people can start or complete their downloads isn't entrapment.

And, of course, it won't be long before some bright spark will come up with a way to defeat it anyhoo.

Those already exist and have done for years. What they're trying to do is go after the common or garden downloader who doesn't go to lengths to obfuscate their IP address. That's most people. Those higher up the downloading pyramid aren't using something as public as bittorrent all that much anyway.

Ultimately this agreement really isn't going to defeat downloading, even if every ISP signed up to it. Even the record companies know that isn't going to happen. What they're now interested in is lessening the blow by putting as may as possible off downloading stuff in case they get caught. They know there's always going to be a core group who don't give a fiddler's monkey about their threats. They're trying to keep that number as small as they possibly can. From their perspective, I suspect that's what it's been about at least since all those apps popped up after Napster went under - before that they quite possibly thought they could totally take down widespread internet distribution but these days they reckon it's all about mitigating the blow on their wallets. Mitigation through litigation, that's all it is.

jos22

sceptre wrote: »

galwaytt wrote: »

...what I want to know is, if you're an Eircom customer, how do the music co's get your i.p. address ?

Oh that's easy. If anything too easy. Every time you make a page request or any other request on the Internet, the recipient has your IP address (yes, I realise I'm being simplistic here). They don't have to ask Eircom for it, if they pretend to be another downloader or uploader, your torrent app just gave it to them. Eircom have a particular block of addresses so it's easy to see whether User X who just asked your computer for file Y is an Eircom customer. You can do that at home yourself.


See above, on my reading of the news story Eircom aren't handing out any info, they're being given the info.


Entrapment is a legal term. What you've described isn't entrapment. You mightn't like their actions, perhaps I don't either but it isn't entrapment. What entrapment is has been confused for most people by inaccurate Hollywood thrillers for the sake of entertainment (nothing wrong with that but it's hardly a course in law 101). Posing as a normal downloader isn't entrapment, it's only entrapment when, say (for example) a police officer encourages you to commit a crime that you would have been unlikely to commit without their encouragement (and even then it's not a universal defence). Record companies aren't police and pretending to have 45kb of the latest Britney Spears album so people can start or complete their downloads isn't entrapment.


Those already exist and have done for years. What they're trying to do is go after the common or garden downloader who doesn't go to lengths to obfuscate their IP address. That's most people. Those higher up the downloading pyramid aren't using something as public as bittorrent all that much anyway.

yes since non profit copyright is a civil matter entrapment dosen't apply entrapped only applies to criminal cases.

nero1916

I absolutely agree with those who define copyright infringements as piracy and thus against the law as it is written. But it was written before the world wide web came to be. People share, the internet has made it easy for people to do this. All across the world, information is just a fingertip away. Do you think musicians will stop making music because they wont get paid? As I said earlier, more musicians are living the dream of playing music precisely because the internet has given musicians the opportunity to SHARE their music and open up opportunities to play live (and if they make a few quid from it, all the better). The industry is filled with greedy executives who see only the monetary value in something, squeeze every last cent out of it and then move on. Its a terrible industry and the movement online that has so put the labels up against the wall should continue until it goes away and a new system of music distribution is created that supports the musicians and no one else. I say finish the labels off, see what grows from their ashes and start afresh. We don't have to keep doing things the same way. Call it the revolution of the music industry. You could look at it as stealing, but then who is losing out? Great musicians will always rise to the top... always. And people will flock to see them. If a band needs a massive marketing campaign, airbrushed posters, and seedy music videos then you have to ask yourself were they all that good in the first place? It ends now. This recession is gonna sober us up, people are going to expect more, and accept no bull****. I'm tired of this crap. And so are many others.

jos22

nero1916 wrote: »

I absolutely agree with those who define copyright infringements as piracy and thus against the law as it is written. But it was written before the world wide web came to be. People share, the internet has made it easy for people to do this. All across the world, information is just a fingertip away. Do you think musicians will stop making music because they wont get paid? As I said earlier, more musicians are living the dream of playing music precisely because the internet has given musicians the opportunity to SHARE their music and open up opportunities to play live (and if they make a few quid from it, all the better). The industry is filled with greedy executives who see only the monetary value in something, squeeze every last cent out of it and then move on. Its a terrible industry and the movement online that has so put the labels up against the wall should continue until it goes away and a new system of music distribution is created that supports the musicians and no one else. I say finish the labels off, see what grows from their ashes and start afresh. We don't have to keep doing things the same way. Call it the revolution of the music industry. You could look at it as stealing, but then who is losing out? Great musicians will always rise to the top... always. And people will flock to see them. If a band needs a massive marketing campaign, airbrushed posters, and seedy music videos then you have to ask yourself were they all that good in the first place? It ends now. This recession is gonna sober us up, people are going to expect more, and accept no bull****. I'm tired of this crap. And so are many others.

agree and disagree
piracy was oringay only applied to those who profited from others work not non profit.
the only "artist" will disappear will be manufactured crap like what pop idiol craps out each year.
as well as crap bands who only care about money
all that piracy means is less crap will be produced as no one will be giving IRMA, BPI, IFPI their money.
but will go to support their favourite acts live.
example of "artist" only in it for the money girls aloud concerts around 85 euro tickets.

in it for the music
drop kick murphies tickets avg 25 euro plus free gigs in their home towns from time to time.

also the records labels were about 5 years too late when they finaly offered a legal approach, to buy poor quality crap at an over priced tag. with region restrictions.

AntiRip

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

I tried that site you mentioned above. I'm down in Cork at the moment but according to that I'm in Dublin 7 :rolleyes:

Btw, just my opinion. Don't think this will work at all. There are so many ways of getting media now online. At work here, there are 15/16 guys including myself that swap external hard drives and 16gb memory sticks on a daily basis sharing files obtained from other friends who got from other friends etc etc.

This is only setting a presidence(sp?) for all copyright material down the line

cgarvey

thomashood10 wrote: »

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.

There's not one part of that correct, best I can tell. In fact, all of your networking-related points on this thread are highly inacurate.

An eircom IP address is associated with a registered account at any given time (and logged). If you have 20 computers on your own network, it doesn't matter, the account holder is still responsible.. if that's what you're getting at? eircom don't share IP addresses across a number of registered customers simultaneously.

jos22

AntiRip wrote: »

I tried that site you mentioned above. I'm down in Cork at the moment but according to that I'm in Dublin 7 :rolleyes:

Btw, just my opinion. Don't think this will work at all. There are so many ways of getting media now online. At work here, there are 15/16 guys including myself that swap external hard drives and 16gb memory sticks on a daily basis sharing files obtained from other friends who got from other friends etc etc.

This is only setting a presidence(sp?) for all copyright material down the line

of course it wont work.
p2p being around in one form or another for years.
then there the warez scenes also around for years.
plus there encrypted rar
can say if a file called random.rar is contains copyright material without dowloading it and extracting with the correct password.

even if they shut down the internet all would have would be larger decrease in sales and nothing to blame it on.
any one who would still buy there crap would be using russing mp3 sites. which IRMA dosnt like so if you buy tracks from them dont be surprised if they give you a strike. also all the sites like play and american sites which sell albums for less than half the cost you buy them here.

either way if an album cost 50cent or 20 euro. if the copyright belongs to
IRMA, BPI, IFPI ,RIAA
I am not interest in it.

ronan675

cgarvey wrote: »

There's not one part of that correct, best I can tell. In fact, all of your networking-related points on this thread are highly inacurate.

An eircom IP address is associated with a registered account at any given time (and logged). If you have 20 computers on your own network, it doesn't matter, the account holder is still responsible.. if that's what you're getting at? eircom don't share IP addresses across a number of registered customers simultaneously.

Agreed.... Also another obvious thing people are forgetting is that eircom already have an easy system in place to track down owners of IP's. Their download statistics system! Obviously to generate bandwidth usage for a customer they need to log all the IP's the customer has been assigned and the exact login / logout times to generate traffic reports. Therefore tracking down the owner of the account is just a simple matter of typing the IP address into a database which already exists for the stats system and getting back the registered account holder which will immediately give them your billing address.

So anyone who says it's impossible for them to track down the owner of an IP should really think again. Most of the system is already in place.

jos22

ronan675 wrote: »

Agreed.... Also another obvious thing people are forgetting is that eircom already have an easy system in place to track down owners of IP's. Their download statistics system! Obviously to generate bandwidth usage for a customer they need to log all the IP's the customer has been assigned and the exact login / logout times to generate traffic reports. Therefore tracking down the owner of the account is just a simple matter of typing the IP address into a database which already exists for the stats system and getting back the registered account holder which will immediately give them your billing address.

So anyone who says it's impossible for them to track down the owner of an IP should really think again. Most of the system is already in place.

ip address dont proof anything. they can be easily faked.
and the music industry mythods of collection this " evidence is flawed and questionable at best.

sure eircom cant very quickly determine which account the ip was leased to. but that dosent not prove that person is guilty.

the only to prove anything is to take the pc in question and exam logs and HDDS to evidence to support that file was either downloaded uploaded or both.

jos22

ronan675 wrote: »

Originally Posted by cgarvey View Post
There's not one part of that correct, best I can tell. In fact, all of your networking-related points on this thread are highly inacurate.

An eircom IP address is associated with a registered account at any given time (and logged). If you have 20 computers on your own network, it doesn't matter, the account holder is still responsible.. if that's what you're getting at? eircom don't share IP addresses across a number of registered customers simultaneously..

wheather or not the account holder is reasonable is open for debate courts in other EU countries ruled that the account holder can not be held responsible if someone else access their router.
see
http://torrentfreak.com/danish-file-sharers-not-responsible-for-wi-fi-theft-080906/

Call Me Jimmy

bk wrote: »

This is a pointless exercise, it won't have hardly any effect. The music industry would be much better off putting it's effort into developing, all you can eat, flat fee, file sharing services.

this.

spurious

nuxxx wrote: »

that said, i dont really care.. 25 euro for a cd that cost less than 50 cents to make, ye fo

Or 25 euro for music you already have paid them handsomely for on LP/Cassette etc.
How my heart doesn't bleed for the record companies.

lmimmfn

aidanodr wrote: »

The RECORD COMPANIES will SUPPLY Eircom with the IP Addresses, not the other way around, hence these companies have ways of tracking Peer to Peer traffic? Maybe this - http://www.baytsp.com/solutions/index.html

Aidan

The record/music industry setup up dummy seeders/leechers, download PeerGuardian2 and it'll block all that crap.

I really cannot see how this will work:
1. People will reduce their broadband package to minimum or get rid of BB altogether/go for cheaper 3 option, 20euro->no line rental, basically Eircon will lose £
2. They cant get rid of peer->peer, thats just stupid, a lot of PC gaming is peer 2 peer, even analysing the packets they can be encrypted and tunneled. Peer 2 peer is use by a lot of people when working from home
3. Can encrypt the torrents
4. Download instead from news groups/usenet or file servers
5. What about older folk who dont know how to secure their network and have everyone using it, do they get their internet removed? cant secure your network=ban lol

Really cant see this working, they'll end up sending out load of letters to people who havnt got a clue whats going on and the whole thing will fizzle out. Maybe they should just stop the net lol

PogMoThoin

Folks, I'm quoting my own post further back here, but it makes sense

PogMoThoin wrote: »

I don't see any change in this, it certainly won't stop me dl'in.

By this Eircom have just fobbed them off with the "We'll have a word with them"..............."We've a 3 strikes and they're out policy"....................... like all other ISP's do. In reality its dynamic ip, here is no tracability for the music industry, all they'll know is its an Eircom ip address.

Smart move Eircom, gets them off Your back and saves money on legal costs.

Its not a legal agreement, its a settlement and a very intelligent move by Eircom, They and only they can pinpoint your ip address.

_Nuno_

spurious wrote: »

Or 25 euro for music you already have paid them handsomely for on LP/Cassette etc.
How my heart doesn't bleed for the record companies.

lol, that's very funny. And completely clueless. I recorded a few CD's. The Studio cost 100 euro an hour. We were there for around 5 or 6 weeks, 6-7 days a week, 10 hours a day. We did 2 months pre production, 12 hours a day 5 days a week. 6 people during during pre production, 7 during production. You think the CD is worth 50 cents?

I don't really download music, and I'm not really interested in the debate, but comments like yours just show how clueless people are.

lmimmfn

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Its not a legal agreement, its a settlement and a very intelligent move by Eircom, They and only they can pinpoint your ip address.

as in my post above, thats not true, they use dummy seeders/leechers for torrents to get ipaddresses, but you can block them with PeerGuardian, and also i doubt that could be used in court or the fact that it was YOU that downloaded it

notnem

Why is Eircom getting involved in what is effectively a business model problem the music industry has? The music industry has spent the last 10 years trying to keep its out of date business model going instead of coming up with solutions that would give users options without restrictive anti piracy measures.
Now Eircom have the additional challenge of attracting new customers while they protect the music industries interests. If you were looking for broadband today would you go with Eircom?
Last April, the European Parliament spoke out against these anti-piracy measures, by saying it would be “conflicting with civil liberties and human rights and with the principles of proportionality, effectiveness and dissuasiveness”.

PogMoThoin

lmimmfn wrote: »

as in my post above, thats not true, they use dummy seeders/leechers for torrents to get ipaddresses, but you can block them with PeerGuardian, and also i doubt that could be used in court or the fact that it was YOU that downloaded it

Yes they get an ip address, one which is dynamically changing, only Eircom can tie that ip address to a customer at that exact time. Getting an ip adddress is very vague and will not pinpoint anyone.

lmimmfn

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Yes they get an ip address, one which is dynamically changing, only Eircom can tie that ip address to a customer at that exact time. Getting an ip adddress is very vague and will not pinpoint anyone.

well its not hard to tie ip address to private internal one on eircoms network, however it is actually worse than that, because eircom hasnt got a clue what IP address ISPs are giving out to users at any one time so to track someone would require:
IRMA contacts eircom with ipaddress, file and time
Eircom looks at what public ipaddress ranges ISPs connected to their access network are using to determine the ISP, and asks the ISP to send on the details of the phone number attached to that ipaddress.
ISP hasnt made any agreement with Eircom to give this information out or in fact pay for someone to spend time looking up that information, also why would the ISP give Eircom info to ban one of their customers, ISP tell Eircom no, lol

Basq

Just heard about this now.. sorry if this has been mentioned already but not arsed in reading 8 pages. If you are warned and continue on as normal, will Eircom simply disconnect your service with them or put a stop on your line?

Because the way I see it - it's a good idea they have in place but surely not infallible.

I mean if a user was warned and continues as normal and Eircom discontinued their service with them, they could simply move to another ISP. If they put a hold on your line, they could go for mobile broadband.

The only way around this I assume would be some kind of an "blacklist" of users that all ISP's should heed.

lmimmfn

basquille wrote: »

The only way around this I assume would be some kind of an "blacklist" of users that all ISP's should heed.

Half the country would be blacklisted lol

niceirishfella

A MESSAGE FOR THE RECORD CO'S LOOKING @ THIS THREAD;

It's taken you over a decade to move on illegal downloaders. Every song on earth has been downloaded for free by people, back catelogues X hundreds of millions of tracks.
Ye have missed the boat and your moves right now are futile.
You are merely learning dino's in a digital age.....but you can't learn fast enough to beat technology and the peer to peers who will just be that inch ahead of you.

jor el

lmimmfn wrote: »

well its not hard to tie ip address to private internal one on eircoms network, however it is actually worse than that, because eircom hasnt got a clue what IP address ISPs are giving out to users at any one time so to track someone would require:
IRMA contacts eircom with ipaddress, file and time
Eircom looks at what public ipaddress ranges ISPs connected to their access network are using to determine the ISP, and asks the ISP to send on the details of the phone number attached to that ipaddress.
ISP hasnt made any agreement with Eircom to give this information out or in fact pay for someone to spend time looking up that information, also why would the ISP give Eircom info to ban one of their customers, ISP tell Eircom no, lol

Please stop giving out such utterly wrong information. You appear to have no idea what's being talked about. I'm even confused by what you mean, when you say ISP! eircom ARE the ISP, eircom give out the IP address to the user, and eircom know EXACTLY who this is at any given time.

The record companies will supply eircom with a list of IP addresses that they determined were sharing their products, without permission. It will then be up to eircom to contact their customer to inform them of this.

If the information was incorrect, you will be able to contact eircom to clear it up. eircom will be able to determine if there was any P2P traffic going through your connection at the date and time indicated by the record companies.

PogMoThoin

Its a fob off, one that works. The music industry constantly send out nasty "cease and desist" legal letters to every ISP. They chance their arm and try and bully. This settlement is an out of court agreement with no legal standing.

I work for an ISP who take cease and desist letters like this very seriously. Being a smaller player in the market we haven't the power to defend ourselves against the money and power of the music industry. We just play along, anything to avoid a day in court, we don't give them any information though.

By this Eircom have saved themselves a fortune spent in legal fees representing itself.

PaddyTheNth

lmimmfn wrote: »

as in my post above, thats not true, they use dummy seeders/leechers for torrents to get ipaddresses, but you can block them with PeerGuardian

Not true. All they need is to issue a notice is to see your IP supplied by the tracker. Doesn't matter if you actually download the stuff or connect to them. Its the tracker which handles initial identification. See the case of the printer being sued.

lmimmfn

jor el wrote: »

Please stop giving out such utterly wrong information. You appear to have no idea what's being talked about. I'm even confused by what you mean, when you say ISP! eircom ARE the ISP, eircom give out the IP address to the user, and eircom know EXACTLY who this is at any given time.

The record companies will supply eircom with a list of IP addresses that they determined were sharing their products, without permission. It will then be up to eircom to contact their customer to inform them of this.

If the information was incorrect, you will be able to contact eircom to clear it up. eircom will be able to determine if there was any P2P traffic going through your connection at the date and time indicated by the record companies.

whats your problem? explain to me whats wrong with that information?
im talking about ISPs that are using Eircoms access network, not Eircom being the ISP. Eircom are both an access provider and an ISP, the article states:

Under the settlement, the record companies will supply Eircom with the internet provider addresses of all persons who they detect illegally uploading or downloading copywrite works on a peer to peer basis.

How is eircom going to contact UTV/Vodafone/whoevers customers based on a public ipaddress used by UTV/Vodafone/whoevers, how can eircom tie that public ipaddress to a customer? they cant, they need to contact the ISP and last i checked other ISPs havnt agreed to this.

hill16dub

firstly eircom can't even run their own company competantly imo do you actually think they can master this crap.
Secondly they would lose a hugh amount of their clients to rivals.
thirdly this settlement was only made to cut the legal bill and avoid a large pay out

its wait and see for eircom.

Knowing their track record it will be a long wait