Sony Music Entertainment Ireland Ltd & Ors -v- UPC Communications Ireland Ltd

bealtine

Here is the text of the judgement in this case:

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/e62523b6bb72b26980257ffe005b5958?OpenDocument

ItHurtsWhenIP

bealtine wrote: »

Here is the text of the judgement in this case:

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/e62523b6bb72b26980257ffe005b5958?OpenDocument

Could anybody give us a TL:DR please? I just woke from a coma after reading the first paragraph .

donspeekinglesh

Mr. Justice Gerard Hogan wrote:

There is, of course, a strong moral case for saying that in such circumstances it would be only fair that ISPs should bear the cost and burden of assisting the rightsholders in detecting infringing activities.

Just like Audi should compensate banks if their cars are used as getaway vehicles. :rolleyes:

Mr. Justice Gerard Hogan wrote:

Mr. Willie Kavanagh, the former Chairman of EMI Records in Ireland, gave evidence – which was implicitly accepted by Cregan J. – that at least 50% of that decline can be attributed to the spiralling problem of anonymous internet infringements. There was also evidence – again, at least implicitly accepted by Cregan J. – to the effect that these costs amounted to some 35 cent per customer per annum.

I'd love to see the actual evidence.

donspeekinglesh

MMFITWGDV wrote: »

Could anybody give us a TL:DR please? I just woke from a coma after reading the first paragraph .

There's nothing wrong with forcing UPC to have a 3-strikes system, and making them pay at least 80% of the cost.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

What is the point if this. Surely just use a vpn and all good.