The internet in ireland and china, not so different now ?

seclachi

This is based off the front page article on the Sunday business post today (22/2/09) I cant seem to find an online version. Basically Irish Internet providers will block access to file sharing websites. The sites will be decided by IRMA (on behalf of big music companies such as Warner and universal, who will then make a court application to have sites they decide on blocked. Eircom will not oppose the orders so they will be granted automatically. Now if doesn’t raise alarm bells for you, it should. I don’t support file swapping myself, as it is basically robbing from peoples livelihoods. But the fact is, what websites we can go to can now be decided by commercial organisations. So if your against file sharing big time you might say so what, its illegal. Thats fair enough, but what is file sharing in the eyes of these companies. Youtube has already had enough run ins, what will happen when they decide youtube should be banned here ? We cant do anything if eircom wont oppose the court order. What about sites that can be considered dual use, such as rapidshare which host files, which some file sharers use ? I was disturbed to hear about the 3 strikes rule, as entire households could be banned for one persons actions, not to mention there’s probably no comebacks or due process, but this really is insane, websites will be blocked on a whim basically. The title maybe melodramatic, but consider this, in china the internet is policed by the government for what they consider the good of there own people. Here its going to be policed by private organisations for the good of there own pockets (And you dont have to look far to see that there are many accusations about how they treat both artists and there customers). The most disturbing thing of all is that I couldn’t find any articles like today’s one in the business post online, or much discussion. Is this going to slip by because people are so rightly concerned about the economy that they wont take a stand ?

drunkmonkey

does the ruling only apply to eircom customers?

+1
It's a step 2 far....

sock puppet

Realistically though is it gonna be that easy to just block people from sites? Would it result in additional costs for Eircom? I wouldn't know myself I'm just wondering.

Amalgam

*cough* proxies *cough*

SeanW

Mother of God :eek:

Between the bank bailouts, the handgun ban, the ever increasing mountain of government red tape and now this ... the more of this I see the more I think we're on the road to Fascism.

thebman

It'll slip through because the average Irish person is too stupid to know what that means.

NewDubliner

What next, moderators censoring posts they disagree with?

galwayrush

NewDubliner wrote: »

What next, moderators censoring posts they disagree with?

Hahah, I doubt Boards will ever be like Indymedia.:D

Hillel

NewDubliner wrote: »

What next, moderators censoring posts they disagree with?

Why not, that's the private sector for you.;)

Dannyboy83

To the OP, I wouldn't worry too much.

Eircom can't enforce this against other ISPs using their infrastructure.

Eircom are the ONLY ISP in the world to do this, unless I'm mistaken.
Provide a link if you refute that claim please.

There are severe complications to Eircom asserting that you have breached File Sharing Regulations due to the Data Protection Regulations.
http://www.dataprotection.ie/docs/Home/4.htm
Essentially, they cannot prove that you have done 'xyz', they can simply kick and your money off their service and onto Smart Telecoms.

According the terms in the original settlement, Eircom don't even need to have proof or suspicion of file sharing. If the record company accuse a particular internet user, then Eircom have to take action.

To be honest, it looks like Eircom want to get out of the broadband market and this is one step on the road to accomplishing it.
There is no other way to explain accepting such exploitative (of Eircom) and unenforcable rules.

It also looks like Eircom are giving the Irish public the two fingers as a result of losing the NBBS and 3 being awarded the National Rural Broadband development scheme.
http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/eircom-loses-out-as-3-ireland-wins-836440m-contract-for-highspeed-broadband-service-1552726.html


Any customer with a half a brain will refuse to support these ridiculous abuses of Freedom of Speech and Data Protection, even Magna Carta i.e. the right to a fair trial!


As a matter of fact, I've been aware of this for a few weeks now, and I am purposely diverting my business from Eircom to Irish broadband.

I don't use Illegal File sharing.
I do download FREE & LEGAL OPEN SOURCE Linux distributions via torrents.
I do download FREE & LEGAL OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE such as NetBeans or Eclipse.
I do get the majority of my news from the internet on sites such as The Times, The Economist, New Scientist, LifeHacker, Strategy Page's Dirty Secrets etc. etc.

Eircom are well known for throttling people's connections, even when doing perfectly legal things with it.
Their contention ratios are vastly poorer than what they claim to be.

As you're no doubt well aware, there is not much that the average citizen can do in this country.
But this is one thing we CAN do.
And that is to vote with your bank account.

I'm just 1 person, how many more people will migrate to Imagine, or BT, or DigiWeb?

Either use you right now, or lose your rights forever.

SeanW

While I would like to believe that you are right, that this is an Eircom only thing, and that we're not looking at a Digital Imprimatur situation, if you re-read the article it would appear only to be the thin end of a thickening wedge.

In particular, IRMA, backed by the likes of rootkit distributor Sony BMG have threatened all the other ISPs that if they do not knuckle under, cave in and give them everything they want on a silver platter, they will be buried under a mountain of lawsuits.

In addition, the article shows that each site blocking will be by court order - so the machinery of the State is involved somewhere. Perhaps a law was passed allowing or mandating this kind of carry on?

After being burned a lot by media companies over my lifetime - moved back and forth to the U.S. and lost all my videos and games each time due to region lockouts, bought CDs that had hidden DRM malware and were even so far out of CD specification that my CD ROM drive that I had at the time crashed when I tried to listen to it and had to use the emergency pinhole (luckily I knew how to do that or I would have spent a lot more PC repair shops), their legal campaign of suing dead people, people who didn't even own computers etc.

I had finally started to have some faith in the media companies again when they started selling music by Mp3. But that's gone, IRMA won't get a damn cent off me anymore.

I've just donated some money to Digital Rights Ireland. Looks like they (we) may have a major fight on the cards.

cavedave

Sunday business post article here.

If record companies infringe copyright will they be taken off the internet? Because an awful lot of Jamiroquai songs sound a bit like Stevie Wonder...

Dannyboy83

SeanW wrote: »

While I would like to believe that you are right, that this is an Eircom only thing, and that we're not looking at a Digital Imprimatur situation, if you re-read the article it would appear only to be the thin end of a thickening wedge.

In particular, IRMA, backed by the likes of rootkit distributor Sony BMG have threatened all the other ISPs that if they do not knuckle under, cave in and give them everything they want on a silver platter, they will be buried under a mountain of lawsuits.

In addition, the article shows that each site blocking will be by court order - so the machinery of the State is involved somewhere. Perhaps a law was passed allowing or mandating this kind of carry on?

After being burned a lot by media companies over my lifetime - moved back and forth to the U.S. and lost all my videos and games each time due to region lockouts, bought CDs that had hidden DRM malware and were even so far out of CD specification that my CD ROM drive that I had at the time crashed when I tried to listen to it and had to use the emergency pinhole (luckily I knew how to do that or I would have spent a lot more PC repair shops), their legal campaign of suing dead people, people who didn't even own computers etc.

I had finally started to have some faith in the media companies again when they started selling music by Mp3. But that's gone, IRMA won't get a damn cent off me anymore.

I've just donated some money to Digital Rights Ireland. Looks like they (we) may have a major fight on the cards.

I just can't see how they're going to enforce it.
You will be free to go from 1 ISP to another.

If they accuse you of downloading, they will have to prove it.
In order to prove it, presumably they would have to admit to spying on your internet usage.
I believe thats inadmissable as evidence as could actually cause them a lot of grief.

How will they regulate independant people using satellite broadband?
It looks to me such a heavy handed fear tactic, nothing more.

The most enlightening thing really is that the like of Microsoft (Xbox 360) and Apple (iTunes) are doing everything they can to make content more available to the consumers.
You can rent digital movies online etc.

One day, sooner or later, they will understand that they simply cannot win and their monopoly is already eroded.
The longer they take to come to terms with reality and the future, the less chance they have of ever recapturing the market.

Its like candle making factories threathening Edison's customers and Tesla's customers, when the debate isn't to use electricity but has moved onward as wheter to use AC or DC.
You can't stop progress.

May sound like a crazy idea now, but what do you think are the chances that Microsoft, Apple, Google will become the next recording studios and the likes of Sony (already flapping with their nosediving share prices) will end up on the scrapheap.

Just as people use cds progressively less, i.e. the formats have changed to electronic means, equally the distributor is changing too.
At present this is only applicable to music files, given the small size.

As the broadband capabilities of this country improve (look to Japan for future trends), so will the method of media consumption.

At the present moment, I don't think Sony can even afford to release the Playstation IV because the Playstation III has been such a flop.
I pity anyone roped into wasting their money on a blu-ray player.

They ought to accept a reduced market share and innovate where they can, or wind up operations while they are still ahead.

turgon

Any thread with the title "The internet in ireland and china, not so different now ?" should be moved to CT straight away. Talk about over-exagerating things.

Chinese people, who cant even search the internet fully and are constantly moderated, would be insulted by you claiming we are getting in any way like them. The fact that you are even voicing your own opinion is proof that what you said is wrong.

thebman

Why the Chinese had to start censoring somewhere?

This is the start of Irish censorship of the Internet.

turgon

thebman wrote: »

This is the start of Irish censorship of the Internet.

So you whole heartedly believe this?

Laughable.

SeanW

Nonetheless it appears we're moving in that direction.

Boston

sock puppet wrote: »

Realistically though is it gonna be that easy to just block people from sites? Would it result in additional costs for Eircom? I wouldn't know myself I'm just wondering.

Could all be easily automated.

turgon

Well in the end I wouldnt be too worried, we can all use our tin-foil hats as aerials to hook onto some broadband satellite in outer space.

thebman

turgon wrote: »

So you whole heartedly believe this?

Laughable.

Believe what? It is undeniably the start of censorship of the Internet in Ireland.

They are censoring sites with links to copyright infringing material. Have you any idea the scope that gives them if they want to take advantage of it to say block bad news about eircom services etc...

Not to mention once you have one form of censorship it becomes much easier to introduce new forms of it as they can say well we already block these type of content so we are just widening this to cover another area. That other area could be more than unacceptable to censor but because people generally don't know a whole lot they will accept a lot easier.

Personally I think the porn industry should get all the sites infringing on their copyrights blocked in Ireland too, then maybe people would actually care :rolleyes:

wes

Terrible news, this. I think it sad that our freedoms can so easily be taken from us in this manner.

The Raven.

seclachi wrote: »

This is based off the front page article on the Sunday business post today (22/2/09) I cant seem to find an online version.

Is this the article?

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=39782-qqqx=1.asp

There are lots of articles on line about it. They are actually threatening disconnection. These two are interesting:

http://torrentfreak.com/music-industry-orders-bittorrent-blackout-090223/

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2009/02/23/irish-isps-to-block-piracy-websites/1

The Raven.

cavedave wrote: »

Sunday business post article here.

Sorry, Cavedave. I forgot you already posted the link after the OP !!

Dannyboy83

Lets think about this for a second.

The average abuser may download 4 films or 4 albums per week.
Probably still buy the odd album, film or cinema trip.
Are these figures anywhere near accurate?........Anybody?

If they no longer have access to the internet, they will have to organise LAN parties where they swap possessions.
Instead of 4 films per week, they'll meet once per month and to make it worth their while, will be exchanging upwards of 500 films and albums per month.

So this would probably increase pirating by 5000%

This is of course ignoring the fact that people sell 'pre-prepared' Ext HDs full of content on places such as GumTree.

These Ext HDs already cost a pittance.
The new SD cards are easily capable of hold 16 DVD quality films or 64 top quality albums.

Perhaps Sony think that people will use BluRay discs to pirate the software?

Fighting Irish

This won't be a problem, unless you use ****ty sites like mininova or piratebay

thebman

Fighting Irish wrote: »

This won't be a problem, unless you use ****ty sites like mininova or piratebay

This leaves the door open for any other type of company to do the same thing and say well you do it for the music industry.

It could lead to massive problems in the future which is why it should be stopped now.

djpbarry

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but are people complaining about the enforcement of copyright law?

thebman

djpbarry wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but are people complaining about the enforcement of copyright law?

It is the manner of enforcement that is incorrect.

sovtek

turgon wrote: »

Well in the end I wouldnt be too worried, we can all use our tin-foil hats as aerials to hook onto some broadband satellite in outer space.

My God...what a bunch of conspiracy nuts in here.
I mean it's not like if I mentioned a specific company in Ireland I won't get banned from Boards.

sovtek

djpbarry wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but are people complaining about the enforcement of copyright law?

This isn't law enforcement. This is enforcement by a private tyranny. That's when you get past the dubious nature of copyright law in the first place.
Oh but you know all those artists would be starving otherwise instead of the poor record companies that expoit the majority of them.

OhNoYouDidn't

thebman wrote: »

It is the manner of enforcement that is incorrect.

Exactly. Why should film and music companies be exempt from new technology?

How come the provider of the service is expected to rat on its users? Are Vodafone held responsible for hoax calls made on their network? Ford for speeders?

Its a dangerous legal precedent.

One thing for it, and thats for anyone on eircom to move.

thebman

I would suggest that anyone who thinks people in here are talking crap and current copyright law is fine to read the below book which is free of charge.

http://free-culture.cc/

Wiki page on book here for initial info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Culture_(book)

also
http://freeculture.org/manifesto/

djpbarry

sovtek wrote: »

This isn't law enforcement. This is enforcement by a private tyranny.

How so? A court order would be required to “block” access to certain websites, if I understand correctly. And we are talking about websites who serially offend, again, if I understand correctly.

Websites (or the owners thereof) are responsible for ensuring that the content they host is legal. In the same way, publishers are responsible for ensuring that, for example, the articles that they publish in magazines have not been plagiarised.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are Vodafone held responsible for hoax calls made on their network?

Vodafone are required to maintain an up-to-date database of customer information, which may be disclosed to the Gardaí (again, by court order) if required. If Vodafone’s network was facilitating illegal activity, don’t you think they’d take steps to combat this?

OhNoYouDidn't

djpbarry wrote: »

Vodafone are required to maintain an up-to-date database of customer information, which may be disclosed to the Gardaí (again, by court order) if required. If Vodafone’s network was facilitating illegal activity, don’t you think they’d take steps to combat this?

If I use my mobile to threaten someone, the Gardai come after me, possibly using phone logs as evidence. But the difference is they don't end up in the dock. Vodafone are not legally culpabale for illegal use of a legal service. I ask again, why are eircom being found 'guilty' for certain usage (which may or may not be legal) of the internet by its customers?

What IMRA are doing is insisting that torrent sites, WHICH HAVE LEGITIMATE AND LEGAL USES TOO are blocked by IP providers.

If I chose to fileshare, I'll take my chances with the music industry. Successfully going after the providers of a service is a dangerous precedent.

RedPlanet

djpbarry wrote: »

Websites (or the owners thereof) are responsible for ensuring that the content they host is legal.

But Pirate Bay do not host anything of the sort.
Neither does Eircom.
The copywrited material is on user's pc's.

djpbarry

RedPlanet wrote: »

But Pirate Bay do not host anything of the sort.

No, but they do make it is easy as possible for users to find the copyrighted material. Aren't the guys who run that site in court at the moment?

Dannyboy83

djpbarry wrote: »

No, but they do make it is easy as possible for users to find the copyrighted material. Aren't the guys who run that site in court at the moment?

Yes, they've been in court, the site was already shut down and opened up by somebody else iirc?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay

Pirate Bay don't actually do anything illegal, they just act as a library catalogue.
Many record companies employ people to upload static and fake songs.

Anyway, you're missing the point.
Could you imagine if the Chairman of Guinness was up for murder because you got too drunk down the pub and went drink driving?

What the Pirate Bay do is unethical, but not illegal!
Maybe they took lessons from Anglo Irish bank

billy the squid

SeanW wrote: »

Mother of God :eek:

Between the bank bailouts, the handgun ban, the ever increasing mountain of government red tape and now this ... the more of this I see the more I think we're on the road to Fascism.

what do you need a handgun for?

djpbarry

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Could you imagine if the Chairman of Guinness was up for murder because you got too drunk down the pub and went drink driving?

Pretty unlikely alright and not really analogous to copyright infringement anyway. However, seeing as you started this analogy a-rollin'...

Suppose Guinness began printing slogans on their products that encouraged drink-driving?

Liam Byrne

wes wrote: »

Terrible news, this. I think it sad that our freedoms can so easily be taken from us in this manner.

Freedom to steal ?

The very phrase "file sharing" is inaccurate; if you "share" a book or CD, then no-one else can use it while you are using it.

The correct phrase would be "file copying", and therefore it's illegal.

What eircom are being told to do is the same as putting a lock on a bank vault, and has nothing to do with censorship.

If your livelihood depended on selling music or photos, and someone was downloading them for free, wouldn't you expect someone to stand up for you ?

Yes, there are arguments about the costs, and yes there are lots of things that should be exempt, like "out-of-print" back-catalogues CDs that - in my view - couldn't be considered to impact on sales because no-one is selling them, but copying files is illegal.....

RedPlanet

djpbarry wrote: »

No, but they do make it is easy as possible for users to find the copyrighted material. Aren't the guys who run that site in court at the moment?

If that's good enough, then are they going to ban google too?
They too make it really easy to find copyrighted material.

Liam Byrne

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

How come the provider of the service is expected to rat on its users?

Are Vodafone held responsible for hoax calls made on their network?

No, but if you were getting such calls you'd surely expect them to be able to stop it ?[/QUOTE]

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Ford for speeders?

Interesting question, that. If the max speed limit is 120kph and they sell a car that can do more than that, then maybe they should be ?

RedPlanet

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Interesting question, that. If the max speed limit is 120kph and they sell a car that can do more than that, then maybe they should be ?

No, can you imagine holding gun manufacturers responsible for deaths caused by owners of their guns?
It would never fly.
Extend that logic and you'll create a pretty scary world.

djpbarry

RedPlanet wrote: »

If that's good enough, then are they going to ban google too?
They too make it really easy to find copyrighted material.

Do they? Does Google maintain a directory of torrent files with the stated intention of disseminating pirated material?

Dannyboy83

djpbarry wrote: »

Do they? Does Google maintain a directory of torrent files with the stated intention of disseminating pirated material?

Given that Google provide the means to find these sites and acts as the greatest library catalogue in the Universe............

How about food high causing free radicals - should we sue mother nature?
How about a child suing his parent due to a genetic defect?
You're opening an awfully big can of worms.

And thats not even getting started on YouTube.:D

SeanW

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No, but if you were getting such calls you'd surely expect them to be able to stop it ?

Let's take this logic to the extreme. Lets say Person X gets tanked up drunk, drives home and kills a pedestrian on the way. Who is responsible? According to IRMAs logic, the bar owner, the car manufactuer, the petrol station that sold Person X his last fill-up, the driving tester who gave him a Certificate of Competency ... all in addition to the actual driver.

IRMA simply wants (and may get) to simply have it every way the like. They can play the victim while being the opressor. They intend to block "hundreds" of websites, suggesting that rather than just overtly single purpose websites like the Pirate Bay, a large section of the 'Net will simply go black if IRMA has its way.

Interesting question, that. If the max speed limit is 120kph and they sell a car that can do more than that, then maybe they should be ?

Great, so if I take my car to a (legal) race or rally where higher speeds are expected, I can just go jump in the lake? Similarly if I have an emergency, medical, fire or something, and need to get someplace quickly, again tough luck?

billy the squid wrote:

what do you need a handgun for?

I don't need a handgun for any reason. But some people use them in sport, and in many juristictions people are allowed to keep pistol for the defense of themselves and their property. In addition some places like Switzerland require all young adult males to maintain some kind of firearm for military/defense purposes. Which is part of why there were not overran by the Nazis in WWII.
Yet in the U.K. (where it has been a massive failure, as gov't prohibitions tend to be) and soon Ireland, the only people who will have handguns will be the criminals ...

djpbarry

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Given that Google provide the means to find these sites and acts as the greatest library catalogue in the Universe...

Are you implying that Google do not block certain sites?

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And thats not even getting started on YouTube.:D

YouTube constantly removes videos deemed to be inappropriate: http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines

Acacia

thebman wrote: »

Why the Chinese had to start censoring somewhere?

This is the start of Irish censorship of the Internet.

Not really. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these measures are being taken to prevent copyright law, and therefore, loss of profit for the record labels? How is that similar to China's censorship of the internet, which is more a matter of controlling the population/ free speech?

Kind of reminds me of those 'PC gone mad!' and " fascist!" cries because people can't walk their dangerous dogs without a leash, for example.

In other words, saying we're becoming in anyway like China is a bit of an insult to the Chinese people who have their freedoms heavily restricted in ways we can't even fathom.

wes

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Freedom to steal ?

Copyright infringement and stealing are 2 different things and that is what the music industry is on about.

Of course, visiting a site like the Pirate Bay is neither stealing or infringing anyones copy right. I should have every right to go to the Pirate Bay and download a Linux torrent. This freedom is being denied to me.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

The very phrase "file sharing" is inaccurate; if you "share" a book or CD, then no-one else can use it while you are using it.

The correct phrase would be "file copying", and therefore it's illegal.

Its the same as putting a lock on a bank vault, and has nothing to do with censorship.

Of course its censorship, entire sites that are catalogues are being blocked due to the demands of the music industry.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If your livelihood depended on selling music or photos, and someone was downloading them for free, wouldn't you expect someone to stand up for you ?

The sites they want blocked do no distribute anything. They don't copy anything.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Yes, there are arguments about the costs, and yes there are lots of things that should be exempt, like "out-of-print" back-catalogues CDs that - in my view - couldn't be considered to impact on sales because no-one is selling them, but copying files is illegal.....

Once again the site they want blocked don't copy anything at all.

wes

djpbarry wrote: »

Do they? Does Google maintain a directory of torrent files with the stated intention of disseminating pirated material?

No, but you can find the MP3s via Google easily enough. In fact you can use Google to find any kind of file type you want, here is an example i found here:

Example from http://blog.hubspot.com/:
"internet marketing" filetype:ppt

Using the above example you can search for a power point file, you could modify it to search for MP3's as well. Of course you don't even need to do the above, you can just type in the name of the music artist and the song name and you can find a download easy enough.

I see no real difference between this and what torrent sites do. Both are catalogues in the end. Neither directly engages in copy right infringement, but both can be used to do it.

jimmycrackcorm

I think Eircom chickened out because IRMA got hold of an email comment from one of Eircoms executives that appeared to support piracy and would have created a huge risk in court for them.

As other posters have said, if they ban TFB then surely the same justification applies to ban Google. In fact Eirom should block Google and show a page instead that they are doing so to prevent piracy on behalf of IRMA and then await the outcry.

Incidentally I used the Pirate Bay to download the Windows 7 Beta. I could have used the MicroSoft download site directly but the torrents are much quicker. Torrents <> illegal!