Eircom enacts three strikes rule

tbh · 25-05-2010 01:01PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Kettle calling the pot black is an old saying. What i meant by it is you dont agree with downloading copyrighted files but you did pirate stuff off the internet. Hence the hypocritical saying.

it's actually "Pot Calling the Kettle black" and I understand what it means.
you asked me about tapes and vids. Of course I used them. Of course I've downloaded the odd file here and there. Of course I accept that it's illegal, and of course I accept that eircom - and all ISPs - are going to have to address the issue at some point.
The point I was making is that they are not going after the downloaders - the people who tape stuff off the radio. They are going after the uploaders, the people who sell the DVDs to use your analogy. It's hardly red china.

Mark200 · 25-05-2010 01:06PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Do you think youtube will not say ye no problem. We want X%.

They won't, actually. Youtube already gets a % of the advertising revenue from Vevo's videos. Google, which owns youtube, operates on the premise that an open internet is the best for business. Any signs that the internet is going to turn into a subscription based service would mean the dramatic fall in the value of Google shares.

tiocimarla · 25-05-2010 01:09PM

Well im not in a seeder. I dont create torrents nor do i sit there letting other people use my bandwidth to share files with. Its another step in nany state. This will not stop filesharing as there will always be the technology to bypass these things. Its more im not happy with someone being given my ip to monitor for file sharing.

Mark200 · 25-05-2010 01:11PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Well im not in a seeder. I dont create torrents nor do i sit there letting other people use my bandwidth to share files with. Its another step in nany state. This will not stop filesharing as there will always be the technology to bypass these things. Its more im not happy with someone being given my ip to monitor for file sharing.

Anyone who uses P2P sharing is already making their IP address viewable to everyone on the internet anyway. The only difference is that this third party will know whether or not you are an Eircom customer.

sink · 25-05-2010 01:16PM

Mark200 wrote: »

Anyone who uses P2P sharing is already making their IP address viewable to everyone on the internet anyway. The only difference is that this third party will know whether or not you are an Eircom customer.

Anyone can tell which ISP an I.P. belongs to anyway be doing a traceroute.

reap-a-rat · 25-05-2010 01:18PM

If you've signed up to a contract can you legally leave before the time set out on the contract? My mother is in an Eircom package deal thing and its ridiculously overpriced, I want mam to change to to UPC because its faster and we can get more aul channels on the telebox and that, but she thinks she has 7 months left on her contract!

ntlbell · 25-05-2010 01:19PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Well im not in a seeder. I dont create torrents nor do i sit there letting other people use my bandwidth to share files with. Its another step in nany state. This will not stop filesharing as there will always be the technology to bypass these things. Its more im not happy with someone being given my ip to monitor for file sharing.

early you said you were not a leech? :rolleyes:

make up your mind.

ntlbell · 25-05-2010 01:20PM

reap-a-rat wrote: »

If you've signed up to a contract can you legally leave before the time set out on the contract? My mother is in an Eircom package deal thing and its ridiculously overpriced, I want mam to change to to UPC because its faster and we can get more aul channels on the telebox and that, but she thinks she has 7 months left on her contract!

unless eircom are not fulfilling that contract then yes, she will have to wait it out

tiocimarla · 25-05-2010 01:23PM

I will upload ratio 1:1

gizmo · 25-05-2010 01:33PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Well im not in a seeder. I dont create torrents nor do i sit there letting other people use my bandwidth to share files with. Its another step in nany state. This will not stop filesharing as there will always be the technology to bypass these things. Its more im not happy with someone being given my ip to monitor for file sharing.

So you're giving out that someone else is doing something you consider illegal to monitor your illegal activity? What was that you said about the black kettle?

tiocimarla wrote: »

I will upload ratio 1:1

So you're infringing copyright yourself and also enabling someone else to do it, that makes you doubly liable in reality.

tiocimarla · 25-05-2010 01:37PM

reap-a-rat wrote: »

If you've signed up to a contract can you legally leave before the time set out on the contract? My mother is in an Eircom package deal thing and its ridiculously overpriced, I want mam to change to to UPC because its faster and we can get more aul channels on the telebox and that, but she thinks she has 7 months left on her contract!

Id ring them up and say u did not sign up to have your ip released to 3rd party compaiies and you want to terminate the contract. If that doesnt work tell them u cant afford it. Cant get blood from a stone. They will not take you to court for termination of contract.

tiocimarla · 25-05-2010 01:39PM

gizmo wrote: »

So you're giving out that someone else is doing something you consider illegal to monitor your illegal activity? What was that you said about the black kettle?

So you're infringing copyright yourself and also enabling someone else to do it, that makes you doubly liable in reality.

I dont c it as illegal i c it as wrong

Hannibal Smith · 25-05-2010 01:39PM

Sorry if these have already been asked, but it's a long thread and I haven't read it all

Is this ban just about illegal downloads?

How come they can't do the same thing with the likes of child porn site visitors?

And surely Eircom are just shooting themselves in the foot given that a lot of people are looking to change to another better/cheaper internet provider, but can't until their contract is up?

tbh · 25-05-2010 01:43PM

tiocimarla wrote: »

Id ring them up and say u did not sign up to have your ip released to 3rd party compaiies and you want to terminate the contract. .

yeah - you're dead right! HOW dare Eircom ignore the contract they sign with their customers!

5.6 Customers may not use the Facility to create, host or transmit material, which infringes the intellectual property rights including, but not limited to, the copyright of another person or organisation.

Inquitus · 25-05-2010 01:47PM

1) P2P sharing, whether from private trackers or not, leaves you vulnerable to being collared by the people employed by the IRMA. They can and do join popular private tracker sites, and all Public trackers are obviously public. Even if you dont seed, and you only upload whilst downloading, they can harvest your IP and reasonably accuse you of uploading and pass on the info to eircom for your 1st strike.

2) Direct download sharing, this is not in scope at the moment, as it is download only, and has not been brought up by the IRMA, but Rapidshare and Megaupload don't provide SSL and via packet inspection your ISP can deduce what you are downloading. This would require a shift in the law, as they are trying to move towards in the UK, where ISPs are responsible for their traffic. Non SSL usenet can also be inspected in this way. A move towards packet inspection would herald a dark path to a more orwellian 1984 vision of the internet.

3) Usenet with SSL and any other direct download by SSL. This creates an encrypted tunnel between your PC directly and the source server, and does not allow your ISP to know anything more than the source IP, your IP and the volume downloaded. Given Usenet provides Linux distros as well as copyright content, this will never be a basis for prosecutions. Most Usenet providers like their direct download colleagues in RS and Mega operate out of safe havens and do not keep information of what has been downloaded, insulating their users from any future legal actions against them.

Eircom have only commited to processing 50 requests a week, from checking torrents alone they (IRMA) could probably gather a years worth of ips in an hour. Whilst this is the first step down the rocky road of internet censorship for Ireland, it's a long way from being the end of the world.

The UK Digital Economy Act, recently rushed through in the last days before the UK election represents the most savage attack on internet rights in law yet seen in Europe.
‎

tbh · 25-05-2010 01:48PM

Inquitus wrote: »

The UK Digital Economy Act, recently rushed through in the last days before the UK election represents the most savage attack on internet rights in law yet seen in Europe.
‎

I would say that the OP was confusing this issue with the DEA when he wrote the OP.

Kintarō Hattori · 25-05-2010 01:50PM

"The European Parliament has been talking about internet access as a basic human right. It absolutely is not. Intellectual property protection is a right," he said.

W*nker.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10152623.stm

lisbon_lions · 25-05-2010 02:15PM

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

W*nker.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10152623.stm

Yeah, Dick, like you are the sort of guy we are going to listen to when it comes to human rights and what a basic human right may constitute. Pr!ck.

Peanut · 25-05-2010 02:20PM

"The European Parliament has been talking about internet access as a basic human right. It absolutely is not. Intellectual property protection is a right," he said.

That make my blood boil.

Regardless of your position on the issue, to have a private organisation call the shots on something as important as this is absolutely sickening.

crótach · 25-05-2010 03:00PM

Guantanamo Bay and private security firms, this time on the interwebs.

"It's ok as long as somebody else does it"

Hitler would probably get away with it today, as long as he was just hiring private companies to do his dirty work.

chopperbyrne · 25-05-2010 03:15PM

The amount of outrage is ridiculous. They'll monitor the type of traffic on 50 random connections at a time and if there is a considerable amount of suspicious traffic, then you'll be contacted about it.

This does not mean that they are monitoring every website you visit or what your browsing habits are.

Hell, Google Ads are more of an invasion of privacy than this.

jimi_t2 · 25-05-2010 03:27PM

tbh wrote: »

yeah - you're dead right! HOW dare Eircom ignore the contract they sign with their customers!

5.6 Customers may not use the Facility to create, host or transmit material, which infringes the intellectual property rights including, but not limited to, the copyright of another person or organisation.

All streaming copyrighted media without an explicit licence for the country of Ireland seems to fall into this net

1) P2P sharing, whether from private trackers or ...

All this is an academic argument at best.

IF YOU'RE DOWNLOADING A LOT, YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR CONNECTION WHACKED.

Also, if they're only processing 50 a week, surely once you hit your first warning they're not going to ''reset'' your download tally and that regardless of stopping or not, you've accrued two more strikes between the point you downloaded something and the point you received the first strike.

sink · 25-05-2010 03:27PM

chopperbyrne wrote: »

They'll monitor the type of traffic on 50 random connections at a time and if there is a considerable amount of suspicious traffic, then you'll be contacted about it.

No they won't even go that far. Essentially they'll watch a bunch of illegal shares and take note of all the IP's that download/upload to/from that share. They're not going to look at any traffic going to/from a single user. If you never go near an illegal share that they're watching, they'll never know what you're doing.

sink · 25-05-2010 03:33PM

jimi_t2 wrote: »

All streaming copyrighted media without an explicit licence for the country of Ireland seems to fall into this net

All this is an academic argument at best.

IF YOU'RE DOWNLOADING A LOT, YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR CONNECTION WHACKED.

Also, if they're only processing 50 a week, surely once you hit your first warning they're not going to ''reset'' your download tally and that regardless of stopping or not, you've accrued two more strikes between the point you downloaded something and the point you received the first strike.

Where do people get this stuff from? Do you just make it up? I work for a small company who has several premises and we use IP security cameras streaming though a VPN over the internet. The amount of bandwidth we use is several gigabytes a day. By your logic we're now going to get throttled by eircom because we're using excessive bandwidth, which is nothing but scaremongering bullshit.

Inquitus · 25-05-2010 03:38PM

jimi_t2 wrote: »

All streaming copyrighted media without an explicit licence for the country of Ireland seems to fall into this net

All this is an academic argument at best.

IF YOU'RE DOWNLOADING A LOT, YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR CONNECTION WHACKED.

Also, if they're only processing 50 a week, surely once you hit your first warning they're not going to ''reset'' your download tally and that regardless of stopping or not, you've accrued two more strikes between the point you downloaded something and the point you received the first strike.

This is horse****, they can only whack your connection if they are provided evidence of your illegal activities by the IRMA. The only way the IRMA can currently provide them with that is if you are using P2P for downloads.

For now, all the main non P2P methods of downloading copyright content are completely safe from the current directive in force at eircom.

Ciaran500 · 25-05-2010 03:41PM

chopperbyrne wrote: »

The amount of outrage is ridiculous. They'll monitor the type of traffic on 50 random connections at a time and if there is a considerable amount of suspicious traffic, then you'll be contacted about it.

This does not mean that they are monitoring every website you visit or what your browsing habits are.

Hell, Google Ads are more of an invasion of privacy than this.

Congratulations on completely missing the point of all the outrage.

oceanclub · 25-05-2010 03:44PM

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Congratulations on completely missing the point of all the outrage.

I'd like to know exactly what counts as "suspicious", for one. (Since I'm a non-Eircom customer it doesn't affect me but just curious.)

P.

Lemegeton · 25-05-2010 03:47PM

anyone who is still with eircom now need their head examined

Inquitus · 25-05-2010 03:48PM

oceanclub wrote: »

I'd like to know exactly what counts as "suspicious", for one. (Since I'm a non-Eircom customer it doesn't affect me but just curious.)

P.

Noone is going to have anything done against them for suspicious web traffic, that's scaremongering.

A company hired by the IRMA is going to gather IP Addresses of Irish People using P2P to share copyrighted music and pass them to Eircom who will start issuing notices.

If you dl 500Gb a month from RS, the only problem you will have will be with Eircoms fairuse limits!

Ireland is the first country in the world where a system of “graduated response” is being put in place. Under the pilot scheme, Eircom customers who illegally share copyrighted music will get three warnings before having their broadband service cut off for a year.

gizmo · 25-05-2010 03:49PM

Okay, I'll try to be very clear with this...

They. will. not. be. monitoring. your. connection.

Irma is employing net monitoring firm Dtecnet to trawl file-sharing sites and identify pirates.

When they trawl these pirate sites they will be harvesting IPs from torrents of copyrighted material.
They will then send these IPs to Eircom who will match them to their customers.
These customers will then earn themselves a strike.

If you don't download illegal material then you won't get a strike, simple as that.

The only real exception will be if you're using an unsecured wireless with which case someone may be using your IP to download such material.

Eircom enacts three strikes rule

Comments