[Article] Eircom to cut off Music File Sharers ..

Orion · 20-02-2009 12:04am

Cabaal wrote: »

Actually in Ireland its technically illegal to record off the radio and it is illegal to copy a tape or CD...in the US you can under fair use but Ireland does not have this in its copyright laws.

This particular argument has been had before. There is a fair use clause in Irish law. I found it before but I'm too tired to go looking for it again. I did link it here somewhere a long time ago.

Orion · 20-02-2009 12:12am

slickmcvic wrote: »

was on the phone to eircom today...they were tryin to get us to switch back to eircom from another provider.....i was very positive towards the idea until i heard about the downloading agreement.

I used to get those calls until I told them very sternly that if they called me again after me asking them three times to stop calling me I would take action to prevent them calling me. They didn't call again.

slickmcvic wrote: »

i spoke to the sales rep and her supervisor and both of assured me that eircom had no intention of monitoring , reporting or disconnecting downloaders....now they did say it was the user that was liable for whatever material that'd be viewed or downloaded but they couldnt have denied the reports any stronger and gaurenteed that they currently do not monitor or report downloads and had no plans to do so in the future.

He's right to an extent. You can't be done for downloading (in law I mean). It is illegal to provide copyrighted content. That's there bittorrent falls down - by downloading you are automatically sharing also - that's the illegal part. Downloading is, however, against all ISPs T&C.

And they don't, won't, can't, monitor or report downloads unless the law is changed. There are privacy implications of the likes of DPI and other monitoring tools that Eircom are not going to breach as then they'd be the ones breaking the law.

However, if he denied the reports that Eircom cut a deal and have promised to disconnect serial downloaders then he's either thick, illiterate or worse: a sales agent

vibe666 · 20-02-2009 12:30am

slickmcvic wrote: »

i spoke to the sales rep and her supervisor and both of assured me that eircom had no intention of monitoring , reporting or disconnecting downloaders

that's like the large corporation who told a large chunk of their employees they were being outsourced to another company but that then that THEY wouldn't let anyone go, whilst fully aware that the company the employees would be transitioning to would make everyone re-apply for all their old jobs (or a new one) and pick and choose only the people they wanted and let everyone else go in favour of their own people.

true to their word, the company everyone used to work for didn't let anyone go, they just let the new guys do it and washed their hands of the whole lot.

BTW, nobody is stopping file sharing, despite what people seem to keep saying. all that is happening is that 4 record companies are compiling a list of IP addresses downloading THEIR specific copyrighted material from whatever filesharing apps they see fit and then notifying the ISP of those IP addresses who then do a "3 strikes and you're out" deal on any customers who's IP shows up.

as things currently stand, this ruling will only affect eircom users specifically downloading material from these 4 record companies and ONLY if eircom decide they've been caught 3 times.

97i9y3941 · 22-02-2009 5:18pm

so basically the people that where feckless and careless about downloading that caused the mess in the first place will be kicked off and sign up again

thewing · 22-02-2009 7:23pm

There was more detail in the Money and Markets section of printed version, but in a nutshell eircom will be blocking torrent sites and other sites it deems offensive pending a court order from IRMA. IRMA have requested other ISP's to follow suit, but they seem to be stalling.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=39782-qqqx=1.asp

97i9y3941 · 22-02-2009 8:48pm

dont need to follow suit,way i see it,a court didnt order them so they can do what they want lol

paddyb125 · 22-02-2009 8:54pm

slickmcvic wrote: »

was on the phone to eircom today...they were tryin to get us to switch back to eircom from another provider

There's a massive race to try and get people to sign up for broadband, there's adverts everywhere!

Donald-Duck · 22-02-2009 8:54pm

Macros42 wrote: »

This particular argument has been had before. There is a fair use clause in Irish law. I found it before but I'm too tired to go looking for it again. I did link it here somewhere a long time ago.

Are you sure about that? I was pretty sure that was for England, not Ireland.

Infini · 22-02-2009 9:03pm

thewing wrote: »

There was more detail in the Money and Markets section of printed version, but in a nutshell eircom will be blocking torrent sites and other sites it deems offensive pending a court order from IRMA. IRMA have requested other ISP's to follow suit, but they seem to be stalling.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=39782-qqqx=1.asp

This is the kinda crap that makes me hate the likes of IRMA RIAA MPAA etc. Id have to laugh tho if their case backfires due to violating some EU law on freedom of speech expecially if the pirate bay turns out as a victory for the defendants.

97i9y3941 · 22-02-2009 9:17pm

pirate bay have often won cases,its just the corporate companies who think they can bully people,use pirate bay as a scapegoat because it does give people links to the copyrighted files,thats only reason they get in so much bother

RKQ · 22-02-2009 9:24pm

This out of Court Agreement:
I understand where the record companies are coming from but if the price of CD's had been as cheap as US etc then downloads might not have become so popular.

We are the only country in Europe (or the world) with this type of "agreement".
It is true to say that we have always had a strong history of Censorship in this country. Look at the films and books that were banned for so long.

We seem to accept "Big brother" interferring with our browsing content -freedom of choice is something our EU neighbours wouldn't give up.

Isn't the web a super highway, a free exchange of ideas, culture and information?

If you regulate worldwide web, then where do you draw the line?

97i9y3941 · 22-02-2009 9:25pm

personally i think rkq its back to human nature again,we do have i tunes and stuff,but as usual there will be a crowd that will not pay for music..

Donald-Duck · 22-02-2009 11:50pm

Infini wrote: »

This is the kinda crap that makes me hate the likes of IRMA RIAA MPAA etc. Id have to laugh tho if their case backfires due to violating some EU law on freedom of speech expecially if the pirate bay turns out as a victory for the defendants.

I don't see why it can't be done, considering they have a child porn blacklist in England. Completely different levels of illegaility, but both are illegal.

97i9y3941 · 22-02-2009 11:53pm

they had no choice really,they cant sue a tennager,or a person that works because that would make them look bad,so basically sue the isp

Beelzebub · 23-02-2009 12:11am

Donald-Duck wrote: »

I don't see why it can't be done, considering they have a child porn blacklist in England. Completely different levels of illegaility, but both are illegal.

They decide what's legal and what's not, what you can watch and what you cannot watch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7364475.stm

They will soon decide what you can and cannot say on line and off line and what you can and cannot think.

It has just now become illegal in the U.K. to photograph the police.

Orion · 23-02-2009 1:24am

Donald-Duck wrote: »

Are you sure about that? I was pretty sure that was for England, not Ireland.

I'm pretty sure. It was during a discussion about IRMA saying it's illegal to rip a cd that you bought to your MP3 player - total ****e. I'll have a look tomorrow see if I can find the clause again.

Orion · 23-02-2009 1:25am

thewing wrote: »

There was more detail in the Money and Markets section of printed version, but in a nutshell eircom will be blocking torrent sites and other sites it deems offensive pending a court order from IRMA. IRMA have requested other ISP's to follow suit, but they seem to be stalling.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=39782-qqqx=1.asp

Yeah sure - go for it. Block them all. They going to block all free proxies too? :rolleyes:

97i9y3941 · 23-02-2009 2:02am

it has been tightening alot,i notice on them server storage sites they are getting tougher on copyrighted material

Cabaal · 23-02-2009 9:12am

Fred83 wrote: »

it has been tightening alot,i notice on them server storage sites they are getting tougher on copyrighted material

Its understandable, why should a company put up with somebody storing, uploading,downloading copyright material (software, movies, music etc) given they make it very clear its against their Terms & Conditions.

It leaves then open to lawsuits if they continue to knowingly allow it

Macros42 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure. It was during a discussion about IRMA saying it's illegal to rip a cd that you bought to your MP3 player - total ****e. I'll have a look tomorrow see if I can find the clause again.

If you could please, I'd be interested in reading it as I understood there was no "fair use" clause in Ireland

Beelzebub wrote: »

It has just now become illegal in the U.K. to photograph the police.

As a photographer I tend to read alot of photography sites including the Photo forum on boards.ie, there are a number of stories about people being detained because they simply had a camera in a certain area of London, so much so that I've been saying Boards.ie should do a Photo Forum meet in London...say 20 people running around with cameras...see who gets stopped first

The same hower does not happen in Ireland as we don't have any crazy anti-terrorists laws

watty · 23-02-2009 9:39am

Copyright itself is a concept going back before the Victorian age and inherently has the concept of "fair use".

The issue is that some activities may not have been tested in court or spelled out in a law.

It's unlikely in the extreme that if you rip your own CDs or DVDs for your own exclusive use that you would get sued.

It's quite feasible if you do the ripping and give away (or charge for) the copies via tape, SD card, CD, DVD, torrents, filesharing site or leaving your own server/PC deliberately open for access on Internet that you would or could be sued successfully.

The first activity is open to arguement under "fair use" even in absence of any clause. The second set of activities, aside from the method of distribution, has always been contrary to Copyright, and is now enshrined in the Geneva convention.

Recently there was even a court case where two employees got 1M and 0.5M even though as employees the Company automatically owned the IP (Copyright and patent assignments) because it was deemed the Company benefited disporportionally to the salary. Poor practice or high prices doesn't justifiy infringing copyright, which hurts the IP creators more and indeed two wrongs don't make a right.

If you rip a CD, pack it in the box and listen only on the MP3 player it's very hard for anyone to successfully argue in court (and with copyright you have to be sued in court) that you infringed the copyright.

The instant you give away or sell the CD, though, you have to destroy all copies of the ripped files or inherently you are in breach of copyright.

This is all in addition to and may even over-ride any conflicting Irish law in a civil case.

Personally as a creator of IP I ensure there are specific clauses in any contract.

Cabaal · 23-02-2009 9:44am

watty wrote: »

It's unlikely in the extreme that if you rip your own CDs or DVDs for your own exclusive use that you would get sued.

I'd have to agree with this, extremely unlikely you'd get sued

It's quite feasible if you do the ripping and give away (or charge for) the copies via tape, SD card, CD, DVD, torrents, filesharing site or leaving your own server/PC deliberately open for access on Internet that you would or could be sued successfully.

Also agreed, we've seen that the industry will very openly go after people that make money from copying, given the industry see's itself as loosing money when people give copied material away its equally likely people will be sued for this....especially if its widespread

The first activity is open to arguement under "fair use" even in absence of any clause. The second set of activities, aside from the method of distribution, has always been contrary to Copyright, and is now enshrined in the Geneva convention.

Agreed

If you rip a CD, pack it in the box and listen only on the MP3 player it's very hard for anyone to successfully argue in court (and with copyright you have to be sued in court) that you infringed the copyright.

The instant you give away or sell the CD, though, you have to destroy all copies of the ripped files or inherently you are in breach of copyright.

Well we know if you own the CD and copy it to say a ipod this is basically "ok" as ipods are for sale, but you are correct when you say if you ripp a CD and then sell this CD you no longer own the rights to listen to the copy and its essentially no different then downloading this copy

This is all in addition to and may even over-ride any conflicting Irish law in a civil case.

Chardee MacDennis · 23-02-2009 10:34am

there is no fair use ploicy under irish law, so under the letter of the law you need to buy a copy for each device you intend to listen to it on - completely unenforceable as said above but still it shows how old our laws are...

watty · 23-02-2009 1:21pm

BastardPrince wrote: »

there is no fair use ploicy under irish law, so under the letter of the law you need to buy a copy for each device you intend to listen to it on - completely unenforceable as said above but still it shows how old our laws are...

As I explained this is not the the case. There are inherent "fair use rights" for Copyright Material even if not spelled out in Irish law.

There is no actual law that says you must buy a unique copy for each device, unless the device is used by, rented by or owned by someone else. Then the law is quite explicit that this is copyright infringement.

It's a red herring. The only issues of importance are:
1) Making copies for others or making copies of material you didn't pay rights for. Straight forward copyright infringement.

2) In Irish law you can (and established by case law) be sued for enabling others or assisting in copyright infringement.

Google does neither (1) or (2).

A person does (1) when they torrent or use rapidshare or CDs/DVDs or newgroups or any other method to exchange files of copyrighted material they do not have ownership of the rights.

A person does (2) when they host a site or newserver for file sharing without forbidding sharing of copyright material and taking reasonable steps to stop it.

A person also does (2) by operating a tracker service or launching a distributed P2P without forbidding sharing of copyright material and taking reasonable steps to stop it. TPB exists to enable sharing of music, videos and software that is copyright even though they don't host the material.

If the TPB was hosted in Ireland and the Prosecution did their homework TPB would be successfully sued for millions. If the Swedish case fails it will only be because of ineptitude of the Prosecution.

Virtually every case under (1) and (2) is rightly won in Ireland. No-one to my knowledge has ever been threatened much less sued for ripping their own disks to their own player. I'd be very surprised if it happened either.

nevaeh-2die-4 · 23-02-2009 1:30pm

I have went on a mad one as of the last few weeks downloading,
I don’t really care if eircom block these websites I just want to get me enough discographies before the they block certain sites. Tbh i cant see that happening

BadCharlie · 23-02-2009 2:12pm

Are people still downloading ?
I have totaly stopped because of this. And i don't even download music i just download a movie from time to time.

CiaranC · 23-02-2009 2:16pm

Of course people are still downloading. An hour of simple research will illustrate how pointless these restrictions are.

sdevine89 · 23-02-2009 2:18pm

Why would you stop its a three strike rule to really think there going to take the millions of people in Ireland to court. They will go after those who download to sell.

Law didn't even get passed in the UK cause they said how could they arrest teenagers in their bedrooms there is absoulty nothing to worry about

Also after talking to a solicitor they reckon that the fact that wireless internet is very hackable will get most people off

Donald-Duck · 23-02-2009 2:53pm

sdevine89 wrote: »

Also after talking to a solicitor they reckon that the fact that wireless internet is very hackable will get most people off

That won't last long, because having poor wireless is your own fault. Like leaving your front door open and getting robbed.

Sparks · 23-02-2009 3:04pm

Donald-Duck wrote: »

That won't last long, because having poor wireless is your own fault. Like leaving your front door open and getting robbed.

Well, no, it's actually got more legs than that because when you get wireless from eircom, the clapham omnibus model comes into play (ie. it can't be assumed that your granny knows how to set up a WPA2 network because she knows that the WEP key that eircom set by default is guessable).

paddyb125 · 23-02-2009 3:05pm

BadCharlie wrote: »

Are people still downloading ?

Of course they are!

[Article] Eircom to cut off Music File Sharers ..

Comments