Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

eircom issues statement on illegal file sharing

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    Jagle wrote: »
    sorry tony irealised afterwards my comment made no sense,
    what i should of said was, maybe we should email LAME informing them that we believe eircom are not paying them for use of there service.

    and boom get eircom in trouble, no offence to you or your job, just spent too long being bent over by eircom, and this whole 3 strikes and your out thing is not only illegal but a horrible infringement of rights

    Ha :D no problem Jagle, I sort of knew that...;) but hoping to get a correct answer on this issue .... can't have double standards..
    If you do have any queries or problems just ley me know though, will do my best to resolve.
    Tony


  • Options
    #93
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    KylieWyley wrote: »
    even if it has come from your home network, who's to say that a neighbour isn't hijacking it? or a parent is unaware what their teenager is doing in their room?
    Depends if they go after the person who is downloading, or if they go after the person who owns the router. The latter would make more sense, as the former could be "my aunties boyfriends dogs sisters owner who just left the country". Also, if it's the former, and you're a first generation user, you'd be at risk due to Eircom putting a weak default username/password on the wireless "out of the box".
    Liamario wrote: »
    Also, if UPC managed to get a ruling in their favour, why don't Eircom rely on that precednt and tell IRMA where to go?
    Probably because Eircom knows that IRMA knows that Eircom doesn't have the money to fight the battle. From what I've seen, the old Aussie owners took most of the money and ran, as opposed to making the network better.


  • Options
    #94
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    Wow. A week on and still no answer on the LAME question...


  • Options
    #95
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    Wow. A week on and still no answer on the LAME question...


    Hi stimpson
    I absolutely apologies for the delay but I will have an answer to this tomorrow. Absolutely.:)
    Tony


  • Options
    #96
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    madmanwithabox wrote: »
    What's Eircoms position on this?
    You mentioned illegal downloads in an earlier post, which of the following 2 scenarios are defined as illegal under Eircoms policy/legal requirements (the notice issued only mentions filesharing, which is not the same as downloading)?

    1) downloading a music track (via torrenting etc), but disabling the ability for that track to be uploaded to anyone else (downloading)

    2) downloading a track and leaving uploading enabled (filesharing)

    It's important to note that "downloading" covers a multitude of activities:
    Opening a video in youtube that contains music from an artist (streaming is still downloading, that information exists on your computer once the streaming has finished, and can be retrieved and the audio track ripped).
    Opening a website that has a music sample playing on launch - again, it's downloaded to your computer.

    Another question, you have several wholesale companies that use your services, will you be providing IP addresses from those companies to any 3rd party in relation to this - is UPC the only way forward?

    Hi madmanwithabox
    apologies for delay in responding
    The key point here is that we are taking action against illegal file sharing of copyrighted material.

    Filesharing is wider than just downloading, it is also making copyrighted material available to other people without consent of the copyright holder.

    In other words, of course there is material that can be shared freely as long as it is not copyrighted or if the person sharing holds the copyright and has willingly agreed to share that material. However, if you are the person sharing and you do not hold the copyright, then you can't share the material without the holder's consent. That is copyright infringement.

    I awaiting an answer to the wholesale question you posed and hope to have an answer next week.
    Tony


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    Still no word on the LAME question?


  • Options
    #98
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    Still no word on the LAME question?
    Hi Stimpson / Jagle

    Again apologies for delay however have found out the following. In this case eircom has licensed its content from third party providers and don’t actually handle the content encoding at our end so do not ( in this case) have a need for a LAME encoding license. I have investigated this and we are satisfied that all relevant licenses and permissions have been duly obtained. I hope this answers the question if you have any further query please let me know.
    Tony:)


  • Options
    #99
    Nerin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,523 ✭✭✭✭Nerin


    eircom: Tony wrote: »
    Hi Stimpson / Jagle

    Again apologies for delay however have found out the following. In this case eircom has licensed its content from third party providers and don’t actually handle the content encoding at our end so do not ( in this case) have a need for a LAME encoding license. I have investigated this and we are satisfied that all relevant licenses and permissions have been duly obtained. I hope this answers the question if you have any further query please let me know.
    Tony:)

    that's kinda funny, eircom didn't encode it and a third party is supposed to do all the legal work, but when it comes to other sites it doesn't roll that way. nice :D


  • Options
    #100
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    eircom: Tony wrote: »
    Hi Stimpson / Jagle

    Again apologies for delay however have found out the following. In this case eircom has licensed its content from third party providers and don’t actually handle the content encoding at our end so do not ( in this case) have a need for a LAME encoding license.

    Actually, as the distributor of the content you do need a licence:

    http://mp3licensing.com/help/#5
    5) Do I need a license to distribute mp3, mp3PRO or mp3surround encoded content?

    Yes. A license is needed for commercial (i.e., revenue-generating) use of mp3/mp3PRO in broadcast systems (terrestrial, satellite, cable and/or other distribution channels), streaming applications (via Internet, intranets and/or other networks), other content distribution systems (pay-audio or audio-on-demand applications and the like) or for use of mp3/mp3PRO on physical media (compact discs, digital versatile discs, semiconductor chips, hard drives, memory cards and the like).


  • Options
    #101
    Peanut2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭Peanut2011


    Unfortunately where I live I do not have a choice so it's Eircom or nothing.. For one I can tell you if UPC came around I would switch like a light!

    Anyhow, what I really want to know is, WHY is Eircom so focused on protecting other IRMA and so little in protecting their CUSTOMERS???:confused::confused:

    After all, aren't we the ones that bring money to your business??

    Do you think that car manufacturers should re-posses cars after the owner has broken rules of the road 3 times?? NO! They instead focus on making the cars safe for their customers.

    What they do with it afterwards it's their own issue. Everyone over 18th can make their choice legally and face penalty under the law if broken.

    To say that IRMA has had a good legal case to make sure Eircom does that would be silly as other providers have not done this.

    I am very disappointed Eircom chose to respond this way but as they have monopoly I am not surprised. I also personally think if IRMA focused more on lowering cost and overheads instead of paying mountain to their lawyers, they would be able to combat this better.

    :mad::mad:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    well done on finding out eircom dont have a license and are therefore breaking the law, good double standards.

    can i begin downloading on my neighbours easily hackable wifi networks, and if so its them that gets cut off right?


  • Options
    #103
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    Actually, as the distributor of the content you do need a licence:

    http://mp3licensing.com/help/#5

    Hi Stimpson
    Yes I can see that, however eircom are not the actual distributor in this case - my last post may not have stated the position but our platform was built and is managed by a third party and they handle our content encoding and distribution.
    It is pretty standard for large companies to outsource part or all of a project.

    I hope this answers your query more fully.
    Tony





  • Options
    #104
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    Nerin wrote: »
    that's kinda funny, eircom didn't encode it and a third party is supposed to do all the legal work, but when it comes to other sites it doesn't roll that way. nice :D


    Hi Nerin

    For more info see my response to Stimpson, how ever it is pretty standard for large companies to outsource part or all of a project to outside companies.
    Tony:)


  • Options
    #105
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    eircom: Tony wrote: »
    Hi Stimpson
    Yes I can see that, however eircom are not the actual distributor in this case - my last post may not have stated the position but our platform was built and is managed by a third party and they handle our content encoding and distribution.
    It is pretty standard for large companies to outsource part or all of a project.

    I hope this answers your query more fully.
    Tony




    So who is the third party? Are they licenced?


  • Options
    #106
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    So who is the third party? Are they licenced?
    Hi Stimpson
    I am afraid I am not in a position to divulge information on third party but I have been assured that yes, they are licensed. If you have any further query I will do my best to answer, however I can only really answer questions relating to eircom and eircom services.
    Tony


  • Options
    #107
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    These guys seem to be the third party according to their recent press release:

    http://www.mediaserviceprovider.com/#News

    It's strange that they don't seem to appear on the list of licensees at mp3licensing.com


  • Options
    #108
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    These guys seem to be the third party according to their recent press release:

    http://www.mediaserviceprovider.com/#News

    It's strange that they don't seem to appear on the list of licensees at mp3licensing.com

    Hi Stimpson
    thanks for this link, but as I stated in my last post I cannot really comment nor do I have any information on parties other than eircom. Sorry.
    Tony


  • Options
    #109
    Nerin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,523 ✭✭✭✭Nerin


    eircom: Tony wrote: »
    Hi Stimpson
    thanks for this link, but as I stated in my last post I cannot really comment nor do I have any information on parties other than eircom. Sorry.
    Tony

    but don't they work for Eircom?


  • Options
    #110
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,815 ✭✭✭stimpson


    eircom: Tony wrote: »
    Hi Stimpson
    thanks for this link, but as I stated in my last post I cannot really comment nor do I have any information on parties other than eircom. Sorry.
    Tony

    I'm get the feeling that you would rather I didn't talk about this.

    MSP seem to be trumpeting their credentials when it comes to licensing their music, yet I see nothing about their software licensing. I might shoot them off a mail to see what the story is.


  • Options
    #111
    Jagle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Jagle


    love how companies come down very hard on individuals but when it comes to them being above board its rarely the case, sure look at the riaa losing a battle in court over not paying artist what it owes them double standards and i love how eircom gladly gets into bed with these scumbags


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Nerin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,523 ✭✭✭✭Nerin


    stimpson wrote: »
    I'm get the feeling that you would rather I didn't talk about this.

    MSP seem to be trumpeting their credentials when it comes to licensing their music, yet I see nothing about their software licensing. I might shoot them off a mail to see what the story is.

    think I'll do the same, be interesting to hear their side of It. all I'm getting from this is ,Eircom don't take any responsibilty for third parties on their site.


  • Options
    #113
    eircom: Tony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,226 ✭✭✭eircom: Tony


    stimpson wrote: »
    I'm get the feeling that you would rather I didn't talk about this.

    MSP seem to be trumpeting their credentials when it comes to licensing their music, yet I see nothing about their software licensing. I might shoot them off a mail to see what the story is.

    Sorry if you get that feeling Stimpson, on the contrary I have pursued this through quite a few channels and continued until I could get you the information you originally asked for. I am afraid I just do not have recourse to comment on your last post and can hardly comment on another companies business. Although you have commented on the paradox here I just do not have any further info on this.
    I can certainly try again, but I have only recourse to info on eircom.
    Tony


  • Options
    #114
    KylieWyley
    Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭KylieWyley


    the_syco wrote: »
    Depends if they go after the person who is downloading, or if they go after the person who owns the router. The latter would make more sense, as the former could be "my aunties boyfriends dogs sisters owner who just left the country". Also, if it's the former, and you're a first generation user, you'd be at risk due to Eircom putting a weak default username/password on the wireless "out of the box".

    That was my point exactly. If it's the first case, an IP log will not tell WHO is downloading- only the IP of the home network the user was on while downloading.

    If its a first generation user being punished then you may not have been downloading copyright materials at all and you're potentially being punished for Eircom's own foibles.

    Either way, it's wrong and it stinks.


Advertisement