irma suing irish downloaders

flodis79

How far has this come? Is IRMA actually suing an Irish people for downloading music from p2p and similar?

Chalk

yeah a guy i knew knows this guy in college who says his cousins mate got charged and fined 17,500eu.

thats about as far as itll get,
bit like eircom charging people for the cap.

flodis79

Really. Was he a heavy user?

Chalk

:rolleyes:

he doesnt exist....

like the matrix or somethin????

aidan_walsh

Chalk wrote:

:rolleyes:

he doesnt exist....

IRMA made sure of that. Just a friendly warning, kiddies...

flodis79

No seriously, how much are they imposing penalties? I was looking for information about Ireland to compare in a European perspective.

Tech Pete

How about just paying for the **** you steal?

Chalk

its not stealing,
its sharing.

Turner

A 14 year old girl's parents in the UK have been hit with a bill for £4000. She downloaded 1400 mp3's for her ipod.

dub45

Chief--- wrote:

A 14 year old girl's parents in the UK have been hit with a bill for £4000. She downloaded 1400 mp3's for her ipod.

From today's Guardian and also reported today in other English newspapers:

Mother faces music for girl's illegal downloads

Steven Morris
Tuesday June 21, 2005
The Guardian

A teenager's penchant for the bands Coldplay and Oasis left her mother contemplating prison yesterday.

Sylvia Price has received a demand for £4,000 in compensation by solicitors acting for the music industry after her daughter, Emily, was caught illegally downloading songs by her favourite artists.

Mrs Price, a self-confessed computer illiterate, said: "I don't know where I'm going to get the money from. I'll have to go to prison because I haven't got that kind of money."

As well as using the PC to help with her homework, 14-year-old Emily had been using file-sharing to download 1,400 songs for free.

Because of Emily's age, Mrs Price, 53, of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, is legally responsible to pay any penalty.

A nationwide crackdown organised by the British Phonographic Industry is under way to try to stop illegal downloaders. Thousands of people use file-sharing software which allows them to swap music files, costing the music industry £1.3bn a year in lost sales. At any one time 8.5 million people across the world are file-sharing.

Earlier this month Coldplay's new album, X&Y, was leaked on to the internet a week before its European release. Other artists, including U2 and Madonna, have had to bring forward releases or offer free tracks on websites after their music appeared online before reaching the shops.

The Prices were caught in a third wave of swoops on what the BPI believes are the worst offenders.

Emily said she did not think what she was doing was wrong. "Everyone I know at school does it. I ... didn't know it was wrong," she said.

"I think I've been picked on because my computer is on all the time and people have downloaded music from my files."

Solicitors Wiggin & Co, which pursues internet pirates on behalf of record companies, said Emily had been breaking the law for two years.

Mrs Price has until July 1 to pay the BPI or face a civil action.

BPI spokesman Steve Redmond defended the tactic of targeting the parents of downloaders. He said: "If we don't demonstrate that copyright law has teeth, we're going to be out of business and countless musicians will lose their livelihood too."

StonedParadoX

christ iv got 18k of mp3's ( just checked )

i wonder whats gonna happen to me

Chalk

post your name and address and irma will come and tell you.
btw are our real identities, as users of boards.ie, protected in anyway?

like would Mr Devore-alera have to tell irma who stonedparadox really is if they ask?

TerrorFirmer

StonedParadoX wrote:

christ iv got 18k of mp3's ( just checked )

i wonder whats gonna happen to me

I had 200 movies. I deleted everyone of them. Just came home one day - and said fcuk it, even though its a tiny remote chance, would it be worth getting done for? Nope.

flodis79

I heard that they're monitoring 100 songs, a mixture of Top 40 and other songs.

mad m

Yup all of Kylie Minogues hits are being monitored.



they should be so lucky.

kin9pin

MobileInfantry wrote:

I had 200 movies. I deleted everyone of them. Just came home one day - and said fcuk it, even though its a tiny remote chance, would it be worth getting done for? Nope.

Did you just delete them or remove them completely?

flodis79

I was researching a bit and saw that 350,000 - 450,000 Irish ppl admitted to downloading illegally. Irma brought around 100 cases to justice last year.

Capt'n Midnight

StonedParadoX wrote:

christ iv got 18k of mp3's ( just checked )

i wonder whats gonna happen to me

for a second there I thought you meant 18,000 !
18KB that must be one of those sample sounds

flodis79 wrote:

Really. Was he a heavy user?

Yes, it's glandular and he can't leave the house, so what with being on line all the time and everything and suffering from depression he succombed to temptation..

StonedParadoX

yes yes ..thats right heh 18kb of sample files..gotta love them sample files

*looks nerviously for irma operatives*

Gone West

flodis79 wrote:

Irma brought around 100 cases to justice last year.

Bullsh1t.

I know people with >6terrabytes of stuff. Wonder what that equals in fines, were they to get caught? :rolleyes:

JackKelly

where exactly are these files being monitored? Kazaa?

flodis79

http://www.irma.ie/piracy2004.htm

Even there are ppl with 6 TB of stuff, they stumble on and fine ppl having just 1,000 songs, like the UK case reported today..

Mr_Man

This came up a couple of weeks ago in the news. AFAIK the situation is that IRMA have to get the names and addresses of users from the ISP's. However the ISP's can't release the names under the Data Protection Act. Therefore IRMA have to go to court to get the court to direct the ISP to release the names.

Now the question is does the judge order a blanket release of names requested by IRMA, or is it on a case by case basis. I would suspect the latter. So there is a point of diminishing return for IRMA where the legal fees outweigh the supposed damage done.

Off course the simple answer to this is for the Music industry to provide music at reasonable prices, and thus reduce the incentive for the file sharers. If they don't then no doubt the technology will be modified to make tracking the filesharers much more difficult.

Just my 2c

M.

CyberGhost

FuzzyLogic wrote:

Bullsh1t.

I know people with >6terrabytes of stuff. Wonder what that equals in fines, were they to get caught? :rolleyes:

wow, you have to introduce me to those people


6tb? what a hell can take that much?


oh and btw about the topic, can't they give a fking break? eircom is sucking all the money out of us from one side irma is starting from another...

lomb

i think it will go to fully anonymous p2p eventually, in the mean time theres newsgroups , cant monitor those but its about 11 euro a month for a sub.

AARRRGH

As far as I know, DOWNLOADING songs is legal, SHARING is illegal.

besty

Mr_Man wrote:

Now the question is does the judge order a blanket release of names requested by IRMA, or is it on a case by case basis. I would suspect the latter. So there is a point of diminishing return for IRMA where the legal fees outweigh the supposed damage done.

i think that is exactly what will happen i think. i dont think that music d/loading is really harming the industry as much as is reported. in fact, in my experience, it has opened up new artists to me and actually made me go out and buy their cd's which i wouldnt have without the downloads. i will never stop buying cd's i want anyway. €13 from CDWOW isnt going to break the bank for something you want

John R

What will be interesting is if/when any of these civil cases go to judgement. AFAIK all the reports from UK/USA have been for out of court settlements. Until there is a judgement in the various juristictions it is all an un-known situation.

Civil cases are all about damages, the extent of financial damage to IRMA et al from downloading is unclear, particularly in regards to an individual. If they cannot prove that the downloader would have bought a CD if they had not downloaded the track the whole loss of revenue arguement becomes very shaky. Obviously there are more intangible issues surrounding intellectual property but if damages cannot be proven it will be very difficult to get a large value judgement.

ATM they are relying on bullying and intimidation by issuing actions for huge amounts and then settling for fractions of the original amount. None of these settlements have any bearing on the legal credibility of the actions however.

The General

I think they go after people for sharing, not as much for downloading and also, its more bit torrent they watch rather than P2P like kazaa or bearshare.

The General

How many people here would actually buy the music they download(if they couldnt download them anymore) i certainly would not and imo most people wouldnt so theres not much of a loss

Gone West

They watch the easy ones(any protocol that IP addresses can be gotten from easily). Bitrorrent, kazaa, bearshare, any gnutella client, edonkey.

"Dublindude:As far as I know, DOWNLOADING songs is legal, SHARING is illegal."
Having copies of copywrighted material on your pc is illegal. you are reading too many american websites, my friend!

"JOHN_R: AFAIK all the reports from UK/USA have been for out of court settlements"
Nope, several cases have been brought to court and tried. Some successfully, some unsuccessful.

"lomb: i think it will go to fully anonymous p2p eventually, in the mean time theres newsgroups , cant monitor those but its about 11 euro a month for a sub."

You are dead right about the fully anonymous networks. They are very very slow, but are completely untraceable to outsiders. You are also right about newsgroups being good. The old-fashioned methods of file-swapping are the best, IMO. That is- FTP, IRC, NNTP. Bittorrent would be great if everybody used proxys and tunnelled, but thats never going to happen.

Lord Nikon

So, it's only gonna hit File-sharers? What about...say allmp3.com or mp3searh.ru

Gone West

the american record industries are ankle-deep in political trouble over those sites. They are both based (AFAIK) in countries with poor relations and nonexistent(or strained) extradition policies witth the US. The IRMA won't take any action (neither will any other recording industry group) until the RIAA has this sorted out.

Random

Chalk wrote:

........a guy i knew knows this guy in college who says his cousins mate .........

TomTom

From the IRMA website

12th April 2005 - Irish Recording Industry Takes Legal Action Against Major Music Filesharers

The Irish Recorded Music Association, IRMA, today announced the start of legal action against "serial filesharers" in Ireland who illegally make copyrighted music available on the Internet. IRMA is seeking damages and injunctions against 17 individuals who have illegally uploaded hundreds or thousands of music tracks onto peer-to-peer filesharing networks.

As a first step, IRMA is asking Internet Service Providers to release the names of the individuals they have found to be abusing copyright on the Internet. The major filesharers subject to legal action include users of the filesharing network FastTrack - on which KaZaA runs - and the Gnutella network.

IRMA Director General, Dick Doyle, said: "This action is being taken against serial file sharers. The top six offenders have uploaded in excess of 2,000 illegal files which is equivalent to 200 albums. This is wholesale mass distribution and is effectively stealing the livelihood of the creators of music. When you consider that each of these individuals could be connected to up to 2 million others at any one time, you begin to appreciate the scale of the damage. We have been issuing warnings for 15 months now. It is time to take action - we are not accepting this situation anymore."

Massive illegal file-sharing is undermining the livelihoods of everyone in the creative chain involved in making music, from composers and music publishers to performers, musicians and record companies. Abuse of copyright on the Internet has contributed to a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland between 2001 and 2004, a decline of 19%.

The current legal action comes after 15 months of educational initiatives to raise awareness of the cultural and economic damage done by illegal file-sharing. These initiatives have included educational brochures sent to colleges and businesses, an extensive radio campaign on national and local radio, countless media interviews and an informative website www.pro-music.org. Instant messages have also been sent to the computers of illegal filesharers worldwide warning them of the consequences if they continue breaking the law.

On behalf of the composers and publishers of music, Victor Finn, Managing Director of MCPS (Ireland) said: "We fully endorse the actions taken by IRMA today. All parties have been fully aware of their responsibilities for some time in this area. Unfortunately, not all have heeded the warnings given and they have made this action inevitable."

IRMA's announcement comes after a breakthrough year for legitimate online music services that are offering legal downloads to consumers. The current legal action is aimed at giving crucial breathing space to legal services and allowing them room to develop. There are five major legitimate services in Ireland: iTunes, Eircom Music Club, mycoke.com, vitaminic.com music club and wippit.co.uk.

The launch of legal actions in Ireland forms part of an announcement from the international recording industry that it is stepping up litigation against illegal filesharers internationally. IFPI, the organisation representing the recording industry worldwide, has today announced a total of 963 new actions launched in 11 countries in Europe and Asia. This brings the total number of cases against illegal filesharers to 11,552 worldwide. In Europe, 248 individuals, mostly men aged 25-35, have already paid average fines of €3,000.

The latest research suggests that the international legal campaign is already having an impact. Overall, the number of infringing music files on the internet dropped from its peak of 1.1 billion in April 2003 to 870 million in January 2005, a drop of 21% despite a sharp rise in broadband penetration worldwide. KaZaa, which used to be the largest and most popular filesharing services, has seen its number of users drop by around 45% since the start of the warning and litigation campaign.

Éanna Casey, Chief Executive of Recorded Artists and Performers (R.A.A.P), said: "R.A.A.P fully endorses the actions outlined this morning by IRMA. Online music piracy is selfish, illegal and has a direct impact on the economic welfare of Recording Artists and Performers. No industry can be expected to allow illegal activities to continue unchallenged, the unauthorised uploading of copyrighted music is now being confronted and R.A.A.P. is committed to protecting its members' moral and economic rights."

masterK

TomTom wrote:

Abuse of copyright on the Internet has contributed to a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland between 2001 and 2004, a decline of 19%.

Got to love this quote, why didn't he say something along the lines of "rip off prices for music in Ireland have caused many people to buy from off shore companies such as Play.com and CD-Wow which has resulted in a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland"

Thumper Long

masterK wrote:

Got to love this quote, why didn't he say something along the lines of "rip off prices for music in Ireland have caused many people to buy from off shore companies such as Play.com and CD-Wow which has resulted in a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland"

masterK you've hit the proverbial nail on the head the in store prices here compared to online, and as for the decline in the use of kazaa, i blame it on the outstanding performance of bittorrent and the availability of full albums etc is the key

Kingp35

Massive illegal file-sharing is undermining the livelihoods of everyone in the creative chain involved in making music, from composers and music publishers to performers, musicians and record companies.

Éanna Casey, Chief Executive of Recorded Artists and Performers (R.A.A.P), said: "R.A.A.P fully endorses the actions outlined this morning by IRMA. Online music piracy is selfish, illegal and has a direct impact on the economic welfare of Recording Artists and Performers.

So they are giving out at the fact that instead of the likes of U2 earning lets say for example €20million on an album they only earn say €15million and they say thats unfair. How in the name of god is it a direct impact on the welfare of these artists if they only become millionaires 5 times over instead on ten times over. Something tells me they will survive ok.

JackKelly

They are basically going after those uploading torrents than?

What exactly are the allowed to prosecute for? I'd imagine they can only go after you if you are caught sharing Music. What about games, and especially movies. I presume they have no right to persue those sharing movies.

I agree with the above. I think they should be more worried about the small artists who are stuggling to make an impact. and in most cases, its too difficult find music of upcoming artists on bittorrent etc. As you said, poor u2 only getting 15m as oppesed to 20m. Also, isn't it true that pirating music is taking from the producers, not the artists who make their money from the concerts.

and tbh, most would have no problem paying a tenner a gig, for decent, quality,fully legal music. €20+ in shops for something that can be gotten for free (beit illegal) in 5 minutes is just not going to work.

Its like putting a prisoner in a cell with a sidedoor and expecting him not to leggit.

bounty

i feel much safer now with my premium newsgroup access and yes i am much better entertained

rsynnott

StonedParadoX wrote:

christ iv got 18k of mp3's ( just checked )

i wonder whats gonna happen to me

Execution, obviously.

rsynnott

neuromancer wrote:

So, it's only gonna hit File-sharers? What about...say allmp3.com or mp3searh.ru

They're legal in their respective countries, AFAIK. Russia has very weak copyright law.

Irishpimpdude

ive been contacted by the Irma and Eircom on several different occations for uploading albums to my eircom webspace, they said if i didnt respond to this in like 3 days they would cut my internet off, so i did

CyberGhost

The General wrote:

How many people here would actually buy the music they download(if they couldnt download them anymore) i certainly would not and imo most people wouldnt so theres not much of a loss

I'd just tape record them off the radio

wheresthebeef

IRMA are trying to make out that U2 are sitting at home looking at an exorbetant eircom bill and waiting for someone to buy a few albums to get a bit of cash it. like they are strapped for cash.
IRMA is afraid cos people are finally questioning their pricing structure and realising that we, as the working class folk, owe these rich wealthy b*stards absolutely nothing. unless we want to actually buy their album. they get enough money.

Its unfair. They should concentrate on making more music, making better music, signing more artists, promoting the music better.

Drop in sales is also due to a decrease in singles sales, cos singles are proportionately too expensive.

If online music places can sell tracks for 99cents. Why does an 11 track album cost 22.99. its all Boolsheet.

Chalk

The current legal action comes after 15 months of educational initiatives

i consider myself fairly uo to date on media goings on,
watch tv, read the papers go to the pub and cinema,
all that sorta jazz

now can somebody, anyone, point to 1 initiative by irma in the 15 months, prior to april12 when all this started,
besides the anti-piracy stuff on their website, as i had never seen or heard of their site before this action, and having ayour own secret website hardly counts as an educational initiive, does it?

seamus

Chalk wrote:

i consider myself fairly uo to date on media goings on,
watch tv, read the papers go to the pub and cinema,
all that sorta jazz

now can somebody, anyone, point to 1 initiative by irma in the 15 months, prior to april12 when all this started,
besides the anti-piracy stuff on their website, as i had never seen or heard of their site before this action, and having ayour own secret website hardly counts as an educational initiive, does it?

With the exception of the ads in the cinema, nothing whatsoever.

Chalk

what ads in the cinema?

ive seen the one -
"you wouldnt steal yer mas purse"
"you wouldnt steal your sisters baby"
"you wouldnt steal.......a movie11!!!"

but they were done by FACT werent they?
or did irma have another one.

rsynnott

Kingp35 wrote:

So they are giving out at the fact that instead of the likes of U2 earning lets say for example €20million on an album they only earn say €15million and they say thats unfair. How in the name of god is it a direct impact on the welfare of these artists if they only become millionaires 5 times over instead on ten times over. Something tells me they will survive ok.

Actually, it barely affects the artists at all; it mostly impacts the record companies.

SparkyLarks

wheresthebeef wrote:

If online music places can sell tracks for 99cents. Why does an 11 track album cost 22.99. its all Boolsheet.

Cost of premisis( rent and rates on grafton street is espensive) Insurance, wages, Light and heat...... Online places don;t have those costs.

It is illegal to record/copy/download copyrighted material withouth the consent of the owner. If it's too expensive then don't but don't steal it.

Electrical shops charge outrageous prices for Plasma screens. and Mr Sony is loaded so I'm going to steal one from the Sony Centre. That is the same logic as illegally downloading material.