Toyota ordered to stop their cars being used in armed robberies

Depraved

Well...it's something like that anyway.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0327/690349-upc-downloading/

The Irish courts once again demonstrating its' complete and utter ignorance of internet technology. Forcing a company to spend a lot of money to prevent its service/goods from being used illegally is just insane.

Not to mention how futile this is. People who get these notices will just go online and check how to hide their activity. The actual impact will be negligible. The sooner we get rid of these old dinosaur record companies the better. They are not needed, yet take the majority of the profits from artists whilst gouging end users so they can make crazy profits.

Charlie19

I thought this was about Toyota.

Lovely Bloke

is it just music? Graaaaaand, I have a free spotify premium account from work, all I download is TV and Movies.

kneemos

Sounds fair to me.
Maybe you have a greater understanding of company law than the learned Judge?

PARlance

Charlie19 wrote: »

I thought this was about Toyota.

I was wondering who Toyoya were for a second.

PopePalpatine

I take it that the judge doesn't know about proxies.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

PARlance wrote: »

I was wondering who Toyoya were for a second.

Well toyoya have more relevance to this item than Toyota have.

OP the analogy doesn't work.

C- must try harder.

Rubberchikken

ok. i thought it was about toyota too . just shows i should pay better attention when reading:eek:

don't know anything about toyoya, so back to my breakfast:D

Notorious97

Think it's time I need to learn about proxies I guess, haven't a clue where to start! Off to Google I go

MarkR

I definitely would download a car.

The_Valeyard

MarkR wrote: »

I definitely would download a car.

3D print one.


Time to proxy the proxy!!

kneemos

Rubberchikken wrote: »

ok. i thought it was about toyota too . just shows i should pay better attention when reading:eek:

don't know anything about toyoya, so back to my breakfast:D

Cheerio.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Sounds fair to me.
Maybe you have a greater understanding of company law than the learned Judge?

Maybe he just has a better understanding of the music industry. Musician livelihoods aren't being destroyed by illegal downloads but by the cut taken by their publishers. Live concerts, merchandise and music sales add up to an awful lot and illegal downloads would affect this very little.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Maybe he just has a better understanding of the music industry. Musician livelihoods aren't being destroyed by illegal downloads but by the cut taken by their publishers. Live concerts, merchandise and music sales add up to an awful lot and illegal downloads would affect this very little.

Want to buy something pay for it.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Want to buy something pay for it.

What does that even mean?

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What does that even mean?

Which word?

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Which word?

Your whole post. How is it a response to mine?

Glenbhoy

kneemos wrote: »

Sounds fair to me.
Maybe you have a greater understanding of company law than the learned Judge?

I don't see that this anything to do with company law at all.

I also think that the judges proposal that UPC pay 80% of the cost of the 'detection' system is utterly illogical, given the judges logic, why does he not suggest that manufacturers of the devices used to play the downloaded content also contribute?

Judges are far from infallible I can assure you.

shruikan2553

Maybe if these music companies spent half the money they spend in court they might create something which works to reduce piracy. Already have to use a proxy to get around the block, this is just a waste of money which will be passed onto the customer due to an industry failing to take responsibility of their failures.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Your whole post. How is it a response to mine?

Musicians should get paid for their product and are being destroyed by illegal downloads.

shruikan2553

kneemos wrote: »

Musicians should get paid for their product and are being destroyed by illegal downloads.

How many musicians have quit due to piracy?

How is this UPCs problem? Are the makers responsible when someone stabs another with a screwdriver they made?

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Musicians should get paid for their product and are being destroyed by illegal downloads.

I disagree. I believe the effect of illegal downloads is negligible and any financial hardship is a combination of outdated business models and greedy publishers.

kneemos

shruikan2553 wrote: »

How many musicians have quit due to piracy?

How is this UPCs problem? Are the makers responsible when someone stabs another with a screwdriver they made?

Facilitating illegal downloads.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Facilitating illegal downloads.

Perhaps we should close the motorways for facilitating speeding

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Perhaps we should close the motorways for facilitating speeding

No we fine people for breaking the law.

Glenbhoy

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Perhaps we should close the motorways for facilitating speeding

An interesting query, but it seems that many people just suspend logic when discussing this topic.
Surely the solution is akin to that used on motorways, the state implement and pay for a detection system in order to enforce the legislation.

_Tombstone_

MarkR wrote: »

I definitely would download a car.

http://rt.com/news/244093-china-3d-printed-car/

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

No we fine people for breaking the law.

But do we fine the people who maintain the motorway?

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

But do we fine the people who maintain the motorway?

Certainly do if they're badly maintained.

Dunno what roads has to do with music though!

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Certainly do if they're badly maintained.

Dunno what roads has to do with music though!

An ISP is the digital equivalent of a toll booth operator. They maintain the road and charge the user. They have no responsibility for the criminal acts of people who use the road.

shruikan2553

kneemos wrote: »

Facilitating illegal downloads.

They facilitate it as much as car manufacturers do speeding and illegal parking. Why arent they the ones to police the roads?

If you believe a crime has been committed they should report it to the gardai instead of asking Toyota to send a letter to people telling them to stop speeding or they will do nothing.

lazza14

what about popcorn time ? does that count ...

shruikan2553

lazza14 wrote: »

what about popcorn time ? does that count ...

I believe so but they have there own VPN to get around such issues you can use for free.

lazza14

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I believe so but they have there own VPN to get around such issues you can use for free.

I always wonder whats the catch with Popcorn time ?

how can all this be free ?

* its f*cking great tho !!

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

An ISP is the digital equivalent of a toll booth operator. They maintain the road and charge the user. They have no responsibility for the criminal acts of people who use the road.

Don't let anybody through without paying either.

Faith+1

Well you wouldn't download a car.....

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Don't let anybody through without paying either.

They don't let anyone through without paying for the use of the road. What you are suggesting is that they ensure that the customer has paid for everything in their car before letting them through.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

They don't let anyone through without paying for the use of the road. What you are suggesting is that they ensure that the customer has paid for everything in their car before letting them through.

OK. We're in the world of Narnia.
Mind the Goblins,or whatever they have there.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

OK. We're in the world of Narnia.
Mind the Goblins,or whatever they have there.

What? Are you serious? Can you actually not even discuss this without some stupid one liner?

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What? Are you serious? Can you actually not even discuss this without some stupid one liner?

No problem discussing music,but your analogies have absolutely zero revelence.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

No problem discussing music,but your analogies have absolutely zero revelence.

I think you just have a complete lack of understanding of what an ISP does.

Sheldons Brain

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I disagree. I believe the effect of illegal downloads is negligible and any financial hardship is a combination of outdated business models and greedy publishers.

That's a bit like saying that the cost of pickpockets is negligible compared to financial fraud, even if it were true it is not reason to approve of or facilitate pickpockets. Both are theft.

enfant terrible

Are the postal services responsible for monitoring what is going through their infrastructures?

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I think you just have a complete lack of understanding of what an ISP does.

Provides internet services?

Little CuChulainn

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

That's a bit like saying that the cost of pickpockets is negligible compared to financial fraud, even if it were true it is not reason to approve of or facilitate pickpockets. Both are theft.

Indeed they are. But we aren't talking about ignoring anything. We are talking about making the owner of the location responsible for the actions of the pickpockets.

Alexis Sanchez

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What? Are you serious? Can you actually not even discuss this without some stupid one liner?

Usually when someone constantly responds with one or two short sentences, it's because they're attempting to debate something that is beyond their intellectual range, so they often struggle to elaborate on their thoughts.

One thing I'll never do is pay for a CD because thy scratch so easily. I've had computers and consoles that scratched my CDs by just playing. It's unfair that I would have to pay for another CD if I want to play that game again.

As for record labels, fúck them. They've ripped-off many aspiring artists and they also pay Music video channel/radio station to play songs to force an artist they signed to become famous, instead of that artist becoming famous through their own talent.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Indeed they are. But we aren't talking about ignoring anything. We are talking about making the owner of the location responsible for the actions of the pickpockets.

I think you're missing a step.
if the owner of the location was the only place that pickpockets could operate then the location owner would be responsible.
Likewise the service providers are the facilitators for illegal downloads and have a responsibility to police it.

Glenbhoy

kneemos wrote: »

I think you're missing a step.
if the owner of the location was the only place that pickpockets could operate then the location owner would be responsible.
Likewise the service providers are the facilitators for illegal downloads and have a responsibility to police it.

I don't think that would be the case, the law enforcement providers would most likely focus their attentions on the location though. Is it a crime to rent hotel rooms by the hour?

I don't see any reason why the provider of a service which is pretty much becoming a basic utility should have to police for possible illegal goings on using that service. Why draw the line at illegal downloads, what about users who commit financial fraud, hacks, libel etc etc, why aren't the ISP's bound to stamp out (or more accurately, take meaningless and ineffective step to pretend to detect) any illegal or potentially illegal activity from any customers?

Put simply, it's the job of law enforcement to enforce laws, if they have a problem with an ISP facilitating illegal activity, then the ISP should be prosecuted in accordance with the relevant legislation.

Hans Bricks

kneemos wrote: »

I think you're missing a step.
if the owner of the location was the only place that pickpockets could operate then the location owner would be responsible.
Likewise the service providers are the facilitators for illegal downloads and have a responsibility to police it.

Does the road infrastructure and law breaking motorist analogy need to be explained to you again ? Why is it the responsibility of ISPs to do the grunt work for IRMA and it's stakeholders ? If you're fine with record labels having access to your private browsing history, public IP and known locations that's your business, I most certainly am not.

Someone should explain proxies to our narrow minded monkeys at Sony and Universal.

kneemos

Hans Bricks wrote: »

Does the road infrastructure and law breaking motorist analogy need to be explained to you again ? Why is it the responsibility of ISPs to do the grunt work for IRMA and it's stakeholders ? If you're fine with record labels having access to your private browsing history, public IP and known locations that's your business, I most certainly am not.

Someone should explain proxies to our narrow minded monkeys at Sony and Universal.

Because as I've explained they are the facilitators and have a responsibility when their company is being used for mass illegal activity.

Wabbit Ears

why UPC and not just all ISPS working within this jurisdiction?