Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

4 record companies in bid to compel Eircom to stamp out illegal downloads

24

Comments

  • #32
    Das Kitty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,231 ✭✭✭✭Das Kitty


    Ha!

    It's mainly the TV and newspapers over there that seem to be filtered. The webternet is more monitored than filtered from what I saw. If they stopped people looking up Islam, how would they catch the terrorists?


  • #33
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    In all fairness though, We can moan about how the big record companies are getting whats coming to them but its the smaller artists that downloading is hurting the most imo.


  • #34
    Trode
    Closed Accounts Posts: 320 ✭✭Trode


    togster wrote: »
    Meh i can't see why people can't just buy the music from the like of i tunes.
    I can't see why people seem entitled to get something for free when it was not intended for sharing.

    To be honest, I agree with you (well, not the iTunes part, for the reasons others stated), I don't download music I haven't bought, and I still strongly object to this lawsuit. I really don't like the idea that Eircom should be forced to monitor what it's customers are doing and either hand that information over to a third party or block certain kinds of content.
    It's not like they'd be much good at it anyway, does anyone expect them to be able to tell a large legal download from an illegal one, especially if they're both coming from a torrent site? Me neither, and I'll be damned if some record company thinks they have a right to see everything I download in case they own some of it. It's like being strip-searched every time you pass HMV, on the off chance you've stolen something, or have been given something someone else stole.


  • #35
    cooperguy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭cooperguy


    Eircom better win this case or it sets a very worrying precident.


  • #36
    togster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭togster


    ScumLord wrote: »
    **** them fat *****! There are very, very few "artists" out there that deserve to get any money for the muck they shovel out as music. They're no more artists than my dog is a ****in' pigeon. They greedy money whore's and they won't get a cent off me.


    What? Lets get this straight. You will only download music that you deem is by a "proper" artist? Thats fair enough. You should then have to pay to listen to their music.

    People can't expect to get music for free. Thats bull ****. You also cannot decide what you do and do not pay for just because you deem it from a "proper" artist. Does your employer decide not to pay you some days because you did a **** days work? This whole argument is bull imo. It's stealing whether you like it or not.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    all I can say to these rip off bastard Irish record rights people is that if you do win, it won't make any difference from me because when i go out shopping for cds, it actually entails me having a look in whatever shop, taking note of certain cds, like my last one - Chris Liebing + Speedy J, Collabs 3000.
    After noting it, I came home, went on ebay and got it less than a third of the price HMV in Henry st were charging.
    Maybe we should make his clear to them bastards that people likemyselfare wellpast that ripped off phase that I was infor so long growing up, not having a credit card or access to the internet, clouding my mnd as to the value actually out there.


  • #38
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    togster wrote: »

    People can't expect to get music for free. Thats bull ****. You also cannot decide what you do and do not pay for just because you deem it from a "proper" artist. Does your employer decide not to pay you some days because you did a **** days work? This whole argument is bull imo. It's stealing whether you like it or not.

    hello have you been living in a cave for the past 10 years?

    As far as I am aware millions upon millions of people have most certainly been able to expect and receive, music, for free. People have also decided to pay and sometimes not. whether it's right or not....


  • #39
    stovelid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    Terry wrote: »
    I'm off now to put in a blank casette and record some music from my friend's vinyl collection.

    Don't do it....


  • #40
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    do they actually have a case? how likely are they to win? doesn't really sound plausible to me that they could force eircom to stop downloads.


  • #41
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    togster wrote: »
    It's stealing whether you like it or not.

    wrong term, really really wrong term

    its not stealing

    my 2c?

    download all your music for free, dont give the labels a penny, but buy gig tickets to see bands you like whether youre going to go or not. buy their official merchandise whether youre going to wear it or not, and if they do something along the radiohead/nin line of things, pay for it

    let the artists make money, not the labels

    paying for your cds does not financially help the artist, going to their shows and buying their merchandise does


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    togster wrote: »
    What? Lets get this straight. You will only download music that you deem is by a "proper" artist? Thats fair enough. You should then have to pay to listen to their music.

    People can't expect to get music for free. Thats bull ****. You also cannot decide what you do and do not pay for just because you deem it from a "proper" artist.
    Of course I can. If I don't like them I don't pay for them. If these artists are doing what they love then whats the big gripe about money for? I don't like the whole attitude that these artists have. The absolute majority of them are just self obsessed assholes out to be rich and famous.

    It's not the up and coming bands that are complaining either from what I can see. It's fat ***** like those in Metallica, that are already stinking rich.


  • #43
    hottstuff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 595 ✭✭✭hottstuff


    ScumLord wrote: »
    It's fat ***** like those in Metallica, that are already stinking rich.

    The band has already stated the biggest mistake of their lives was the Napster thing.


  • #44
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    they didn't even sue napster due to lost revenues, it was control over their music more than anything else, the whole "i disappear" thing pissed them off.


  • #45
    Das Kitty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,231 ✭✭✭✭Das Kitty


    stovelid wrote: »
    Don't do it....

    Anyone know where I could get a high enough res version of this so I can make a t-shirt.

    I'm also looking for the "Home Sewing is Killing Fashion" one but I think that's less likely.


  • #46
    Agamemnon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭Agamemnon


    BOLLOCKS to the recording industry. Some years back, they forced CD Wow to stop selling CDs produced outside the EEA, driving up prices for the consumer. I'll support bands by going to their gigs and concerts but I could not care less about the recording industry. Anything that upsets them makes me happy. They're a shower of money-grabbing dinosaurs who can't deal with the reality of the internet age.


  • #47
    doonothing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭doonothing


    To be honest, with how easy it is to get the music for free, you'd be stupid not to download it. Regardless of moral obligations to keep the record companies rich enough to exploit the artists, it's a case of common sense.


  • #48
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    phantom_lord wrote: »
    they didn't even sue napster due to lost revenues, it was control over their music more than anything else, the whole "i disappear" thing pissed them off.

    Maybe they should worry more about quality control over their music, useless washed up chancers.


  • #49
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    Bambi wrote: »
    Maybe they should worry more about quality control over their music, useless washed up chancers.
    :rolleyes:


  • #50
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    If you were even born back when metallica were a decent band you could throw eyes at me on this issue sonny. But you werent. So don't.



    :pac:< ppftt kids these days


  • #51
    User45701
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,905 ✭✭✭User45701


    Well i dont download music so this does not effect me, ive downloaded a few things in the past but if the music is good i will pay for the soundtrack or to go see the person/band.

    TV shows is another story. There is nothing wrong with downloading them if they are enw episodes because tv shows should be worldwide release, this would solve allot of problems with downloading.

    Another problem is people putting DVD collections online because if you love a show you should pay for it, although the retail mark up in this country is stupid. Things like splitting seasons in 1/2 and making double the proffit. **** that.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Basq
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,501 ✭✭✭✭Basq


    Das Kitty wrote: »
    Anyone know where I could get a high enough res version of this so I can make a t-shirt.

    I'm also looking for the "Home Sewing is Killing Fashion" one but I think that's less likely.
    http://www.cafepress.com/killingfashion
    http://www.cafepress.com/buy/home+taping/-/pv_design_prod/id_15953680/p_storeid.90874404/pNo_90874404


  • #53
    phantom_lord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭phantom_lord


    Bambi wrote: »
    If you were even born back when metallica were a decent band you could throw eyes at me on this issue sonny. But you werent. So don't.



    :pac:< ppftt kids these days


    lol, fair enough.


  • #54
    Das Kitty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,231 ✭✭✭✭Das Kitty


    basquille wrote: »
    http://www.cafepress.com/killingfashion
    http://www.cafepress.com/buy/home+taping/-/pv_design_prod/id_15953680/p_storeid.90874404/pNo_90874404

    Legend!


  • #55
    Kold
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    F*ck em. Let them starve.


  • #56
    thelordofcheese
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭thelordofcheese


    I don't think they have a leg to stand on really.
    P2P programs like uTorrent are perfectly legal and have many legitimate uses, for example i've downloaded linux distros, open source software and game mods via torrents and it's a great system for getting this sort of stuff and bypassing the sometime atrocious traffic on websites.
    Basically, p2p traffic isn't inherently illegal, it just depends on what the user is doing.
    Think of it like owning a car, it's perfectly fine to drive your car down to the local school, but quite another to drive into the school and start doing doughnuts in the middle of the schoolyard during break time.

    I can only imagine that EMI, Sony et al are just chancing their arms hoping to get some kind of bizzare ruling in their favour, but in reality it sounds like some crotchety old men complaining about kids today and their rap music and how it gives them the brain damage......


  • #57
    iFight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭iFight


    Can't really see it going anywhere, fairly clutching at straws to blame Eircom... Don't think much more will be made of it.
    smemon wrote: »
    why won't youtube just start up their own label (...) end of record companies.

    Except for the super-label you are suggesting?

    Won't other sites similar to Youtube start doing it then and we'd be back pretty much exactly where we are now?


  • #58
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    togster wrote: »
    This whole argument is bull imo. It's stealing whether you like it or not.

    Its copyright infringement


  • #59
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,643 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    togster wrote: »
    People can't expect to get music for free. Thats bull ****. You also cannot decide what you do and do not pay for just because you deem it from a "proper" artist. Does your employer decide not to pay you some days because you did a **** days work? This whole argument is bull imo. It's stealing whether you like it or not.

    Aww take your whinging elsewhere.

    Course you can expect to get music free. Heard of the radio? Is it wrong to record a song off of that rather than going and out buying it?

    I recorded Sin City a couple of months back on my VCR. Was that stealing too since I didn't go out and buy the DVD?

    Don't give me such bollocks. In the words of the great Bill Hicks, "Quit putting a goddamn dollar sign on every ****ing thing on this planet!"


  • #60
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    Aww take your whinging elsewhere.

    Course you can expect to get music free. Heard of the radio? Is it wrong to record a song off of that rather than going and out buying it?

    I recorded Sin City a couple of months back on my VCR. Was that stealing too since I didn't go out and buy the DVD?

    Don't give me such bollocks. In the words of the great Bill Hicks, "Quit putting a goddamn dollar sign on every ****ing thing on this planet!"
    Slightly different thing you're talking about there. The companies will already have been paid by the broadcaster.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    BaconZombie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,814 ✭✭✭BaconZombie


    The best quote was from the Head of BlacKnight the last time this came up.

    Quote:

    .......Irish ISP's will not introduce filtering without a gun been held agains their heads......
    Also the main reason their do not want to start filtering is that same reason the company I work for don't either.

    Simple : If you start filtering and blocking "illegal" stuff on the ISP/Company side them EVERYTHING you do not block/filter the user presumes is LEGAL, and you {The ISP/Company} is LEGALLY responsible if the user does something illegal because you did not block/filter it.


    */ There is a thread on the BroadBand Forum ; http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055252618 */


Advertisement
Advertisement