irma suing irish downloaders

Gone West · 22-06-2005 04:29AM

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 · 22-06-2005 04:37AM

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

Gone West · 22-06-2005 04:42AM

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 · 22-06-2005 04:56AM

Chalk wrote:

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

TomTom · 22-06-2005 05:04AM

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 · 22-06-2005 08:20AM

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 · 22-06-2005 10:02AM

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 · 22-06-2005 10:32AM

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 · 22-06-2005 10:54AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:06AM

i feel much safer now with my premium newsgroup access

and yes i am much better entertained

rsynnott · 22-06-2005 11:07AM

StonedParadoX wrote:

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

i wonder whats gonna happen to me $:\$

Execution, obviously.

rsynnott · 22-06-2005 11:09AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:13AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:14AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:14AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:21AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:36AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:39AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:40AM

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 · 22-06-2005 11:40AM

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.

Einstein · 22-06-2005 11:42AM

Mr_Man wrote:

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.

bear in mind it aint the music industry thats chargin the fortune, its the governments tax that costs the money.
Do what most people do, buy it online for 10 euro cheaper!

Chalk · 22-06-2005 11:42AM

nah,
its not really.

why do public libraries work?
never seen anyone out screaming for authors rights to earn.

SparkyLarks · 22-06-2005 11:43AM

rsynnott wrote:

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

Who react by cutting costs, and to do that they cut investment on new bands, especially alternative bands, which they see as high risk but with a much higher possible return.

They'll concentrate on low risk manufactured bands with a guarenteed albiet lower return

JackKelly · 22-06-2005 11:46AM

SparkyLarks wrote:

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.

no it isn't, and i hate when people use that line. Its not at all the same.
If i rob from a electrical shop, im robbing something that has been produced. Im taking from them. If i were to download a song, im not physically taking somthing from them,instead im limiting their profit.

SparkyLarks · 22-06-2005 11:46AM

Chalk wrote:

nah,
its not really.

why do public libraries work?
never seen anyone out screaming for authors rights to earn.

Nothing illegal about sharing CD's as in giving a CD to your friend. Cos then you don;t have the CD.

Duplicating a Cd or file and giving a copy away and keeping the original isn't sharing

Libraries don't photocopy books and then give the photocopy away for ever. Ther is only one copy of the book which has been paid for.

rsynnott · 22-06-2005 11:48AM

SparkyLarks wrote:

Who react by cutting costs, and to do that they cut investment on new bands, especially alternative bands, which they see as high risk but with a much higher possible return.

They'll concentrate on low risk manufactured bands with a guarenteed albiet lower return

Hmm, they've been doing that anyway, as far as I know.

The thing about this industry, and I think the reasan that people feel it's ethically acceptable to steal from them, is that they don't actually employ many people relative to their cashflow; they are basically cash-cows for shareholders.

Also, they've done their legal case, and their case in the public eye, a lot of harm by accepting a tarrif put on recordable CDS (and in some countries MP3 players) intended to compensante the copyright holders for copying. They can't have it both ways.

SparkyLarks · 22-06-2005 11:49AM

TimAy wrote:

no it isn't, and i hate when people use that line. Its not at all the same.

Fair enough, ther are diferences.

Breach of copyright is different to stealing a TV.
But both are theft and aren;t justified

SteM · 22-06-2005 11:50AM

besty wrote:

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 agree with you 100% here. It's also encouraged me to see some smaller bands live when they play in town that I would have never even heard of.

JackKelly · 22-06-2005 11:51AM

true.
ones theft and illegal (robbing a telly)
ones just illegal.

As said though, i'd be happy to buy a gig of music legally,if it was convenient and reliable. But who wants to spend outrageous amounts for 15 songs.

I'm still interested to know what the situation is on them prosecuting for dl'in movies,games and apps?

SparkyLarks · 22-06-2005 11:55AM

SteM wrote:

I agree with you 100% here. It's also encouraged me to see some smaller bands live when they play in town that I would have never even heard of.

So you don't download major artists???

DO you donwload songs you heard on the radio??

Or just bands you've never heard of to see if you like them??

Because either way it doesn;t matter.
Someone creates a song, they then decide whether to sell it to a record company, to produce it them selves or to release it to the public.

If the artist decided to allow people download their song for free then theat fine.
But if the artist, i.e the person who greated the music decides to produce it them selves/ sells it to a record company. Then we the public who enjoy the song created by the artist should respect their decision breach the copyright.

irma suing irish downloaders

Comments