Eircom to cut broadband over illegal downloads

Grindylow

So I'm guessing this rules out P2P filesharing things such as Limewire?
But what about youtube song downloaders?.. :P

FHB

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

No, they would have to initiate civil proceedings against Facebook/or youtube for your IP. Then initiate civil proceedings against your ISP for your details. Then initiate civil proceedings against you. These company's will remove copyrighted material when reported though, which is the most cost effective option.

Oh, thanks goodness. I was getting worried there for a second. I'm audioswapping my youtube videos with music on them anyway though, just so I'm completely clear.

LordSutch

Just move to BT/Vodafone, UPC, Perlico, etc . . . right?

amacachi

What is "suspicious activity"? A lot of uploading? A lot of downloading? How is one's IP not personal information?
I don't download music but from the wording of reports it seems I may still get caught up in this.

Cuddlesworth

Noel2k9 wrote: »

So I'm guessing this rules out P2P filesharing things such as Limewire?
But what about youtube song downloaders?.. :P

I doubt limewire will stay unaffected. Its the most basic form of filesharing, pure one to one with the full blame on the uploader. Easy pickings for this type of OP. I used torrent as a example because you can generate lists of millions of individual IP's in a week.

Camelot wrote: »

Just move to BT/Vodafone, UPC, Perlico, etc . . . right?

Unless a Irish judge opens the floodgates with a dubious verdict on one of the upcoming cases. Eircom just settled for this solution then let it go to court.

amacachi wrote: »

What is "suspicious activity"?A lot of uploading? A lot of downloading?

Huge upload is genrally the remit of torrents. ISP estimations I saw before implied 5% of customers use 95% of the bandwidth. I don't know if this is valid but does sound about right to me.

amacachi wrote: »

How is one's IP not personal information?
I don't download music but from the wording of reports it seems I may still get caught up in this.

When you download you give your IP freely to people you connect to. It frequently changes and can be taken and replaced at any time by the ISP. The information behind this is personal. This could happen to you if somebody cracks your wireless(takes about two minutes for most home wireless networks) or if you get a administration error.

Overheal

kickoutthejams wrote: »

I think Eircom are in a catch22 situtation; they're having financial troubles now so possibly they were forced to cave in by the Record Companies waving a potential legal battle in front of them which they couldn't afford.

And so they're presumably going to lose many clients, putting them in even more financial difficulty.

Personally I think Eircom is just the Weakest link.

And so is Ireland. No offense; just observation.

Warner and all these other multinational publishers want to clamp down on all of it, everywhere. But theyve been stonewalled by other countries that have either strong views or the clout to fight them. They've already tried a few times and for the most part have failed to tackle the United States FCC. But that may not last forever either.

And so with the Greece and Ireland thing Im sure these companies saw a weakness in Eircom and jumped on it. Simple as that really; these companies are many times more influential than Eircom and now its backing down and bending over. It has to, or it risks bankruptcy. And with it, they hope to set a new precedent that could very well poison the internet landscape.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Wait maybe I'm missing something here: But whats to stop everyone from using say a proxy?

Your ISP is your bottom line. Your modem connects to your ISP before being proxied through any other IP.

Wolfe Tone

Overheal wrote: »

Your ISP is your bottom line. Your modem connects to your ISP before being proxied through any other IP.

So then your ISP would know you were connected to a proxy but wouldn't know were/what you were connecting to next? It would be apparent why you were using said proxy but they wouldn't be able to prove what you were doing? Or do I have the wrong end of the stick?

Overheal

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

So then your ISP would know you were connected to a proxy but wouldn't know were/what you were connecting to next? It would be apparent why you were using said proxy but they wouldn't be able to prove what you were doing? Or do I have the wrong end of the stick?

if you can tracert, they can tracert. They still peddle everything you send and receive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traceroute

whytek

@sink above has it right, @mussolini, you've got the right idea, possibly not quite the right terminology. the rest of youz sprouting ****e like as if you understand the tek issues, go read up a bit.

Also, take note of what @ei.sdraob says - sounds like a right head da ball, but on the button too, if, that is, this thing really does ahead - they've tried it in so many other places, like someplace called EU for example, where it failed. search "3 strikes". ah oirland.. always gotta be about 3 years behoind de rest o' dem...

P.S. The reporting in the original times article is pathetic..
the way they say "Ireland is the first country in the world..." as if it was something innovative. "After everyone else has rejected it, Ireland is to go ahead and implement a three year old proposal to..." would be more accurate.

Oh dear oh dear, irma, imro... all these people speaking for others.. (worth noting this:
"to identify Eircom customers who are sharing [...] a specific list of its members’ copyrighted works [..]"

Hopefully it all leads to more legit sharing. I'd be watchful that if eircom do phone you, ask them which copyrighted works you are allegedly sharing and verify that it is an IRMA member's work.

December

I'm not too worried about this, as with the internet people will find a way around situations like this... such as Ipredator. :pac:

Overheal

whytek wrote: »

@sink above has it right, @mussolini, you've got the right idea, possibly not quite the right terminology. the rest of youz sprouting ****e like as if you understand the tek issues, go read up a bit.

Also, take note of what @ei.sdraob says - sounds like a right head da ball, but on the button too, if, that is, this thing really does ahead - they've tried it in so many other places, like someplace called EU for example, where it failed. search "3 strikes". ah oirland.. always gotta be about 3 years behoind de rest o' dem...

P.S. The reporting in the original times article is pathetic..
the way they say "Ireland is the first country in the world..." as if it was something innovative. "After everyone else has rejected it, Ireland is to go ahead and implement a three year old proposal to..." would be more accurate.

Oh dear oh dear, irma, imro... all these people speaking for others.. (worth noting this:
"to identify Eircom customers who are sharing [...] a specific list of its members’ copyrighted works [..]"

Hopefully it all leads to more legit sharing. I'd be watchful that if eircom do phone you, ask them which copyrighted works you are allegedly sharing and verify that it is an IRMA member's work.

Friend Hello and welcome to The Internet.

Freemancon

Hi guys and gals,

If you ask me it is not about terms and conditions...

This type of strong arm tactics are not what should be allowed. It is not the reponsibility of ISPs to regulate and police the internet. I would encourage you to join us on our facebook page.

this is a community page....the address forwards to our page.

http://www.InternetNeutralityIreland.com

I know this is a plug but it is a good plug - Not for Profit

Scofflaw

whytek wrote: »

@sink above has it right, @mussolini, you've got the right idea, possibly not quite the right terminology. the rest of youz sprouting ****e like as if you understand the tek issues, go read up a bit.

Also, take note of what @ei.sdraob says - sounds like a right head da ball, but on the button too, if, that is, this thing really does ahead - they've tried it in so many other places, like someplace called EU for example, where it failed. search "3 strikes". ah oirland.. always gotta be about 3 years behoind de rest o' dem...

P.S. The reporting in the original times article is pathetic..
the way they say "Ireland is the first country in the world..." as if it was something innovative. "After everyone else has rejected it, Ireland is to go ahead and implement a three year old proposal to..." would be more accurate.

Oh dear oh dear, irma, imro... all these people speaking for others.. (worth noting this:
"to identify Eircom customers who are sharing [...] a specific list of its members’ copyrighted works [..]"

Hopefully it all leads to more legit sharing. I'd be watchful that if eircom do phone you, ask them which copyrighted works you are allegedly sharing and verify that it is an IRMA member's work.

Thanks for the input, whytek - now if you had managed to say that a bit more politely and a bit more clearly, that would have been even better.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Spiritoftheseventies

To be fair you are given three warnings. After the third warning you are cut off a week. On the fourth time its a year.

Wolfe Tone

Hopefully Eircom will take the "Yeah yeah, sure we will do that! *throws list of ip addresses in bin*. I imagine if UPC win their court case Eircom wont bother with any of this stuff.

DeVore

So dumb it hurts.

Immediate response will be:

1. Mass defection from Eircom and loss of future sales.

2. Creates a perfect business opportunity for a commercial "anonymiser" service operated outside the state.

3. Creates the perfect incentive for an arms war which is very simple for "them" to progress and very hard for Eircom/IMRA to counter.

Note, I'm not making any judgement on the rights and wrongs of file-sharing, I'm saying that this isnt a good way to go and I think even Eircom knew that but cant afford to fight "Big Content".

DeV.

Spiritoftheseventies

Eircom are taking a big risk on this. Nothing stoping the file shares from switching over once their contract runs out. As a broadband provider with a large share of the market I wonder are they over playing their hand here a bit.
Agree in theory with what they are doing as Im sure theire is pressure from the record companies to act but at same time would they do it if they werent as strong in the market.

caseyann

In all honesty i think this is just the beginning of a much larger control over the Internet.
One starts they all follow and soon you become the person under the magnifying glass.Like they have done with so many other things in the world.And people become accepting of it to the point it is controlling them.

Killer Pigeon

Can I still use sites like Dirpy.com to download youtube sound tracks?

jimi_t2

2. Creates a perfect business opportunity for a commercial "anonymiser" service operated outside the state.

You seen the piratebay homepage recently?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPREDator

Liam Byrne

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

You were doing it in moderation, too. It's always been the case that people would share CDs and records, but the Internet brings this sharing to a new level

I would argue that the internet has redefined sharing, and incorrectly at that.

No-one who ever shared a book would have contemplated it involving photocopying the entire book, making a distinct copy that they could take home; they would have used the correct term - copying.

There is no-such thing as "file-sharing", unless that file remains on a central server.

Also, for those concerned about privacy, how do you know who is sharing what song, when you log on ? Because they've told you. And if they've told you, they've told the world.

It's the real-time, caught-red-handed equivalent of posting a video of your crime on YouTube.

So it's not even as if eircom are doing anything different. Someone is logging in, viewing the list at a particular time, and essentially "snitching" on you, at which stage eircom is taking action due to your lawbreaking.

wes

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So it's not even as if eircom are doing anything different. Someone is logging in, viewing the list at a particular time, and essentially "snitching" on you, at which stage eircom is taking action due to your lawbreaking.

There have been plenty of false positives with this kind of thing, with dead people, and people without a computer being sued. The entire thing is hardly fool proof.

Liam Byrne

wes wrote: »

There have been plenty of false positives with this kind of thing, with dead people, and people without a computer being sued. The entire thing is hardly fool proof.

There have been plenty "false positives" with car registration plates at speed cameras and toll cameras as well.......it doesn't stop the overall scheme being implemented and those false positives being dealt with as necessary.

gandalf

As Tom says the best way to deal with this is for people to stop using Eircom as their provider and switch to another. Some of the other providers will realise that it be advantageous for them to say they do not monitor downloads or they cannot cut people off (with the exception of them going over agreed download limits or not paying).

This upcoming court action against UPC by IRMA will be very interesting. If UPC win then this whole strategy by Eircom and their IRMA puppetmasters will be in tatters. Eircom will have to re-evalute this policy.

Personally it makes no difference to me. I will never be an Eircom customer again given extremely bad customer service from them in the past. This is just another reason to recommend that friends stay away from them.

Liam Byrne

deadtiger wrote: »

As Tom says the best way to deal with this is for people to stop using Eircom as their provider and switch to another.

No, the best way is for people to not engage in illegal activity.

Then if there are loads and loads of "false positives", there will be a case to be made for Eircom to discontinue the practice.

Waking-Dreams

UPC weren't doing too well last year in terms of profits (they ran out of funding for certain divisions - as well as their disconnects being through the roof) so they may not have the funds to sustain a costly legal battle either.

the best way is for people to not engage in illegal activity.

While I agree in principle, it's wishful thinking (and people also use torrent sites et al for non-illegal purposes). Not everyone takes their moral compass from laws. We also know the law prohibits people from breaking into other people's homes but the law alone isn't enough; people still need to lock their doors and buy alarms accordingly because it makes sense. Putting out an appeal to "stop the break-ins" will fall on deaf ears.

People engage in illegal activity lots of times, from drunk driving, to assault, to speeding, to stealing things from their workplace, you name it. The difference with the Internet is that we may one day see its architecture change where it will be difficult for the layman to get around the 'locked door' of protected content, etc.

We have laws which prohibit certain activities in society, yet we see people choosing to disregard these laws. If its a law or some regulation, they can intentionally choose to disobey it, or rebel against it. But with code, you can't do that so easily. Regulation through code is problematic for the would-be law-breaker, because it is too good. The architecture of the Internet could gradually change to suit the needs of both governments and commerce. Think of how tight online security could become.

All posters in this thread who consider themselves interested in the whole Internet/Privacy thing should have a read of 'Code: Version 2.0' by Larry Lessig. Recommended reading.

mneylon

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No, the best way is for people to not engage in illegal activity.

Then if there are loads and loads of "false positives", there will be a case to be made for Eircom to discontinue the practice.

Nobody is condoning any activity that is illegal, however there are a multitude of reasons why this move by Eircom is bad.

I've tried to put my thoughts into something vaguely coherent here:

http://blog.blacknight.com/irma-eircom-and-the-death-of-freedom.html

Overheal

Blacknight wrote: »

Nobody is condoning any activity that is illegal, however there are a multitude of reasons why this move by Eircom is bad.

I've tried to put my thoughts into something vaguely coherent here:

http://blog.blacknight.com/irma-eircom-and-the-death-of-freedom.html

You have to PAY for the right to pimp your blo - oh wait. :pac:

good read, guy.

DeVore

jimi_t2 wrote: »

You seen the piratebay homepage recently?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPREDator

You see.... I am the very rarest of individuals, a "poorly informed prophet".


I predict things that have *already happened*.


Nostradamus was a pussy.

DeV.

Mits

I am really disapointed with Eircom agreeing to this.

My main downloads are TV show's and the odd movie. Mainly because the shows are add free and I can view a few episodes together.

If eircom block my access they will lose a customer.