Eircom enacts three strikes rule

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

They can only punish them insofar as declining to serve them. Same thing goes for a shop owner kicking out a bunch of dodgy looking teenagers. The shop owner is not required to prove their guilt in a court of law, nor should they. Such a system would be untenable.

We aren't talking about a shop. We're talking about Internet Service Providers. The situation isn't that complicated, analogies aren't really needed here. If every ISP in the country put in place a policy that contravened European Parliament decisions, the EU would quite rightly ban the practice. I seriously doubt Eircom's decision will survive its first legal challenge.

sink wrote: »

I was specifically referring to the insurance analogy brought up. There are certain legal principles that have to be upheld, they are laid out in documents such as 'Bunreacht Na hEireann' that even the legislature cannot break. Countries that do force businesses to operate at a loss will soon find no business left to regulate, Zimbabwe tried that and it didn't work out too well.

You're referring in broad generalities to absolutely nothing. What clause of the constitution are you talking about here? You also didn't respond to the question asked: I'm not sure how forcing media groups to use the established court system is making Eircom lose money to be honest, maybe you could clarify that for us?

alastair

Just voted with my feet. Been with eircom broadband since the trial days. Been on the Business Plus (or whatever - 12meg service) package for a few years. I don't like this IRMA capitulation/cozyness one little bit, and it's provided that last nudge over the edge. I've signed up for Magnet's 24meg deal, which should provide some savings and a bigger pipe with better contention.

Have to say that eircom's service has been good on the broadband side, even if it had become less than competitive price-wise. UPC looks like a great deal, but I couldn't allow myself to re-enter that world of pain that was NTL. Service reviews don't help remove that fear - Magnet seem a bit better in that regard.

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

The insurance company could refuse to insure whoever it likes without ever needing to enter a court room. The the person purchasing insurance in that case would have to take the insurance company to court and would have to show grounds of unfair discrimination.

Guilty until proven innocent? Sorry, thats not how society or the legal system works, and it is the case here where people are being accused of illegal activity without recourse to the justice system.

As others have pointed out however, I'd expect this to blow up badly in Eircom's face. It might even result in the last mile connection being renationalised and taken away from Singapore Telecom.

sink

Amhran Nua wrote: »

We aren't talking about a shop. We're talking about Internet Service Providers. The situation isn't that complicated, analogies aren't really needed here. If every ISP in the country put in place a policy that contravened European Parliament decisions, the EU would quite rightly ban the practice. I seriously doubt Eircom's decision will survive its first legal challenge.

You are confused. Eircom aren't contravening anyones rights.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You're referring in broad generalities to absolutely nothing. What clause of the constitution are you talking about here? You also didn't respond to the question asked: I'm not sure how forcing media groups to use the established court system is making Eircom lose money to be honest, maybe you could clarify that for us?

I was addreesing general missconceptions on your parts specifically.

"Eh the legal system can step in to do whatever it likes."
No it can't for reasons outlined

"Presumably there were still alternate providers willing to service Tallaght and Clondalkin though? Because if there wasn't the legislature would be stepping in."
No it wouldn't for reasons outlined.

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

You are confused. Eircom aren't contravening anyones rights.

I didn't say anything about rights. I said they are putting a policy into place which directly contravenes European Parliament directives.

sink wrote: »

I was addreesing general missconceptions on your parts specifically.

Can you answer the question please.

sink

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Guilty until proven innocent? Sorry, thats not how society or the legal system works, and it is the case here where people are being accused of illegal activity without recourse to the justice system.

As others have pointed out however, I'd expect this to blow up badly in Eircom's face. It might even result in the last mile connection being renationalised and taken away from Singapore Telecom.

I'm getting sick of this i'm not going to keep going over the same points again and again.

No one in the case of the Eircom denying service, or an insurance company denying coverage is passing a legal judgement. The only people that can do that are the courts. At the same stage a company does not need to prove someone is guilty in a court of law to refuse them service. It's really basic.

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

I'm getting sick of this i'm not going to keep going over the same points again and again.

No one in the case of the Eircom denying service, or an insurance company denying coverage is passing a legal judgement. The only people that can do that are the courts. At the same stage a company does not need to prove someone is guilty in a court of law to refuse them service. It's really basic.

You haven't gone over any points worth mentioning. You handwaved at the constitution (no response in specific clause questions), and you said that the legislature can't force companies to lose money, so for the fourth time, I'm not sure how forcing media groups to use the established court system is making Eircom lose money to be honest, maybe you could clarify that for us?

sink

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Amhran Nua wrote: »

I'm not sure how forcing media groups to use the established court system is making Eircom lose money to be honest, maybe you could clarify that for us?

Can you answer the question please.

I've answered this question. You just completely misunderstood and confused one thing with another.

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

I've answered this question.

No, you haven't.

sink

Amhran Nua wrote: »

No, you haven't.

Ok I'll spell it out as simply as I can, but this is going to be the last time.

"I'm not sure how forcing media groups to use the established court system is making Eircom lose money to be honest, maybe you could clarify that for us?"

At no point did I say Eircom would loose money, that was in specific relation to the insurance company analogy. It had little to do with Eircom. You are confusing the two issues.

"You handwaved at the constitution (no response in specific clause questions)"

That was in specific response to your assertions that the legislature could do what it wants. It can't it has to obey they constitution amongst other documents.

vipervillain

anyone know of a good website that can test your landline number and bring up isps available to you rather than go to each individual isps website...??????

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

At no point did I say Eircom would loose money, that was in specific relation to the insurance company analogy. It had little to do with Eircom.

Ah, so why did you bring it up since it has nothing to do with what we're talking about? If you're trying to make out that private industries cannot be regulated this is plainly incorrect. So if its of no harm to Eircom, whats the problem?

Ciaran500

mendusa wrote: »

Is it just uploaders that this three strike rule applies to or did I read that wrong.Interestingly UPC are in court soon over the same issue.I was thinking of switching to them anyway 10 euro more and you get 15mb broadband instead of 3mb with Eircom.I wouldn't think there would be many uploaders in Ireland.Funnily enough the piratebay has an ad on its main page about a service that hides your IP address and its going with the heading Ipredator Ireland:D.

Anyone that downloads through bittorent is an uploader even if you're not seeding downloads after they finish.

tiocimarla

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Ah, so why did you bring it up since it has nothing to do with what we're talking about? If you're trying to make out that private industries cannot be regulated this is plainly incorrect. So if its of no harm to Eircom, whats the problem?

Now you just Trolling, Ur wrong and its plain as day, we were using analogies to dumb it down for you but you still dont get it. Some thing can only be dumbed down so much mate. It doesnt matter if its a isp, an insurance company, a shop or a nightclub. A private business has the right to Refuse your custom if you dont obey the small print etc. Now im gonna ignore u coz ur a bit stubborn to be fair.

banquo

This exactly why we need to reignite Ireland Offline.

Amhran Nua

tiocimarla wrote: »

Now you just Trolling, Ur wrong and its plain as day, we were using analogies to dumb it down for you but you still dont get it. Some thing can only be dumbed down so much mate. It doesnt matter if its a isp, an insurance company, a shop or a nightclub. A private business has the right to Refuse your custom if you dont obey the small print etc. Now im gonna ignore u coz ur a bit stubborn to be fair.

I think the txt spk dumbed it down plenty for me, thanks.

sink

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Ah, so why did you bring it up since it has nothing to do with what we're talking about?

I didn't bring up the insurance analogy. I was simply addressing you're misconceptions when you replied to a third person. You then got the two mixed up.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

If you're trying to make out that private industries cannot be regulated this is plainly incorrect. So if its of no harm to Eircom, whats the problem?

Of course private industries can be regulated, that is not what i'm saying at all. However you can't regulate any company to give compulsory service, there is no such regulation for any private industry. That only happens in the public sector.

When you sign up to a service you sign a legal contract and agree to abide by the terms and conditions of that contract. Those terms will in most cases will include the right on the part of the service provider to terminate the service unilaterally if it is felt that you broke any part the terms and conditions. If you feel that your service was terminated unfairly or without due consideration then you can seek legal recourse and take the service provider to court. If you win that case you can seek for your service to be restored and you can sue for punitive damages, and for loss of earnings.

That is the way the justice system for all industries works in this country and the telecoms industry should be no different.

Amhran Nua

sink wrote: »

Of course private industries can be regulated, that is not what i'm saying at all. However you can't regulate any company to give compulsory service, there is no such regulation for any private industry. That only happens in the public sector.

No doubt this is the line of thinking that IRMA is following as well. Unfortunately for them, private companies do not fall outside the law, and if this practise becomes prevalent within the ISP industry in Ireland, regulated it shall be.

I mean are you seriously discarding European Parliament directives on the basis that its a company doing the rulebreaking rather than the legislature?

Copyright infringement is a matter between the alleged infringer and the copyright owner. It has nothing to do with Eircom or any other ISP, especially since they are not specifically enabling this activity. Look at the legal definition of safe harbour:

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has notable safe-harbor provisions which protect Internet service providers from the consequences of their users' actions (Similarly the EU directive on electronic commerce provides a similar provision of "mere conduit" which while not exactly the same, serves much the same function as the DMCA safe harbour in this instance).

So really in this case its Eircom and IRMA who are at fault, and they will be found to be so.

drdeadlift

im gona down load so much music tonight.,.,,,i heard Vodafone are lots better than them anyways

Mr Freeze

Any non eircom people go to thepiratebay site today???

I see they have updated their logo especially for us Irish!

Honda08

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Well, it seems they went ahead and enacted a three strikes rule in Eircom.
Just in case anyone is confused over what that means, your internet can be cut off if your internet habits are categorised as "suspicious".

No court of law is involved, no proof is required, no intervention from the justice system. Indeed, you don't even need to be pirating anything, if you are downloading open source ISOs you can be cut just as quickly.

Ireland is the first country on earth to have this enacted. This also goes against EU rulings on the matter.

There is no proxy, no encryption and no possible disguising of your internet browsing habits against this, if the company that is providing internet access thinks you are acting suspiciously, they can and will cut you off.

On general principles I just got off the phone with a very nice man in BT about transferring over our internet connection, I'll save money on a faster service and have been assured that BT has no intention of enacting a three strikes rule. Took about ten minutes.

This is the best way to deal with the issue - tell everyone you know, your friends and family, to move away from Eircom and go to another provider. Its time to push back against this overweening corporate presence in our homes and on our communications network. If its not internet they are delivering, its not money they'll be getting.

even though i dont download any torrent stuff..
just switched from eircom, bye eircom, its been expensive.
saving a good bit by switching..... when i get home switching over mothers, sisters ..

say no to the nanny state!

adios eircom..

einshteen

We can organise a national boycott of Eircom & IRMA quite easily (with your help!).

Compiling a list of IRMA record companies, contact details for alternative ISPs (make it easy for people), throw together a few posters and put them up here so that anyone can stick them up around the place.

Three strikes has failed in other countries, and it will fail in Ireland, but only if we do something about it.

If you want to help, PM me.

dadiomouse

I'm curious to see how this pans out.
Very curious.

Certainly took long enough to get started, & 50 a week ain't much, so it's clear that Eircom aren't exactly embracing this idea with a smile.

Just as clear is the fact that Eircom is going to lose a huge % of customers over the next few weeks over this...
& that leads me to believe that what we'll see at some point this year is Eircom bringing this ruling back into the courts under it making them "anti-competitive"...
at which point we will see either:
A) The ruling & 3 strikes being removed from Eircom
The ruling & 3 strikes being extended to cover all ISPs in Ireland.

I have a strong suspicion that we'll see "B"...
(unless EU steps in).

Jumpy

Ok lets clarify a few things.

Eircom do not "want" to do this. They took the easy way out in a court case and settled. They have since tried to fight this settlement and failed. Ok bad choice in the first place for them.
They dont want to police their network and they dont want to lose customers. They are now forced under court order to do this, so there will be no decision to back down. They now simply have no choice.

It would be foolish to think that the only reason that eircom want this done is because they are "anti-piracy". They really, really dont want to do it, but now they have to.

Secondly, those who think that their details will be given out can relax. The only reason this can even be done without individual court orders on each downloader is because eircom do not have to give out personal details. eircom do the cutting, not the record labels. No personal data is ever passed on.

Pauleta

Gonna move from Eircom tomorrow. I dont upload music or films but i use torrents programmes when im watching sport and i watch a fair bit of sport online.

FHB

This doesn't affect videos which you've uploaded to youtube does it?

MrStuffins

Eircom have been messing about for so long!

If i paid the bills, i'd have moved a long time ago! But after this i'm spending all my energy to get the bill payer to move.

I've already been on to UPC and when we move, i am going to write Eircom a nice letter to tell them exactly why i am moving and why i will be encouraging others to do the same.

MrStuffins

FHB wrote: »

This doesn't affect videos which you've uploaded to youtube does it?

No, but i wouldn't be surprised if this was next!

Or even cutting off people for WATCHING Copyrighted videos up on You Tube!

FHB

MrStuffins wrote: »

No, but i wouldn't be surprised if this was next!

Or even cutting off people for WATCHING Copyrighted videos up on You Tube!

I know. It's ridiculous isn't it? This won't do a thing except get customers to move from eircom. They really are shooting themselves in the foot here. Or at least, whoevers forcing them to do this, is shooting them in the foot. xD

Crooklyn

i'ms ins yours skynets, lollings aways ats yours futiles attempts contrllings ours internets.

- The Pirate Bay, May 23d