Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

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

Options
1…6791112…27

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    This thread is for discussion of eircom's decision to curb P2P users, based on information supplied by the music industry. It is not for asking how to get around this, or where else you should download copyrighted material. Posts of this nature will be removed. We're already on dodgy ground when discussing "stuff" that is downloaded from the Internet, and Boards is not the place to come to find out how to do it.

    If you know, fair enough, but don't spread the word on a public forum, that could be held liable for what you say.


  • Options
    #243
    Orion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    Sudsy86 wrote:
    The router gives you a dynasmic ip address but your modem itself has a static IP adress...Ericom are a DSL service and do not Use a DHCP server...This is 1 of there main restrictions due to being an Analogue service...
    All I can say is:
    Sudsy86 wrote: »
    Please stop stating stupid facts

    You are confusing your own internel network, which uses the DHCP service on your router, with your DSL connection which uses the DHCP service (Radius iirc) in Eircom. When you turn on your PC it gets an IP from your router (probably 192.168.x.x) which is a local address. But your router gets it's external IP address from Eircom and it is assigned dynamically unless you have a business account in which case you get a static one.

    Just as an FYI - even if you have a static address it's still assigned by DHCP - using an account reservation.


  • Options
    #244
    Kinetic^
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,249 ✭✭✭✭Kinetic^


    They better not send me letters for downloading linux distros!!!!!1eleventy!!!!!!!!!!!!


  • Options
    #245
    Winters
    Registered Users Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    You know you could just go out and buy the odd bit of music from HMV or iTunes and not have to worry about being disconnected. Sure, how much of those discography's that you downloaded have you really listened to and enjoyed, besides that one song they had that you really wanted?

    Routing traffic, renting servers and vpn's will all cost you money and will only work up until the point of laws catch up in other countries, which may be sooner than you anticipate. In New Zealand you are disconnected immediatly without it having to be proven, so at least count yourselves lucky that all your personal information is not being passed onto the Record Industry/Gardai and you at least get some warnings.


  • Options
    #246
    Orion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    I know the feeling. I've downloaded about 60Gb of Linux distros this month alone :D Damn the distros for constantly releasing new episodes versions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    jor el wrote: »
    This thread is for discussion of eircom's decision to curb P2P users, based on information supplied by the music industry. It is not for asking how to get around this, or where else you should download copyrighted material. Posts of this nature will be removed. We're already on dodgy ground when discussing "stuff" that is downloaded from the Internet, and Boards is not the place to come to find out how to do it.

    If you know, fair enough, but don't spread the word on a public forum, that could be held liable for what you say.
    since when is discussing anything on a public forum illegal?

    Man the internet has gone to the dogs.


  • Options
    #248
    dbrowne9212
    Registered Users Posts: 98 ✭✭dbrowne9212


    I also happen to know that Music and Film companies like Warner or Sony etc... have been daily sending info on illegal downloaders (IP address etc...) with threats of leagal action to ISPs for years. These were always ignored -potential breech of the data protection act from any subsequent action that may have been taken being the main reason.


  • Options
    #249
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Looks like the UK is taking on the pirates with new legislation following in the footsteps of yesterdays Eircom decision.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jan/29/digital-britain-lord-carter-broadband


  • Options
    #250
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    20goto10 wrote: »
    since when is discussing anything on a public forum illegal?

    Man the internet has gone to the dogs.

    Boards.ie can be held liable for content that is posted on it, you do not have 100% freedom on boards to post and say anything you want.

    And yes discussing stuff in a public forum can be illegal depending on what it is.

    Anyway this thread is not for discussing boards rules, take that kind of issue to help desk.

    Back on topic....further off topic discussion gets deleted


  • Options
    #251
    dbrowne9212
    Registered Users Posts: 98 ✭✭dbrowne9212


    Wincest is best! wrote: »
    In New Zealand you are disconnected immediatly without it having to be proven, so at least count yourselves lucky that all your personal information is not being passed onto the Record Industry/Gardai and you at least get some warnings.

    again - the data protection act protects us here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    Winters
    Registered Users Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    dbrowne9212 wrote: »
    again - the data protection act protects us here.
    Unless a court order is requested, at which point the ISP will just generally bend over and not really care. It would be an expensive legal battle which the ISP really isint willing to waste it on.

    Eircom would have weighed up the options and generally chose the best one. They do not need to alter their network or have to install any sort of monitoring network. They keep all your information private and dont have to waste money on employee's having to police it all. Just a somewhat automated mailing system. Comparied to other coutnries this is a pretty decent offer. What will be required is iTunes to have lower prices and same for other online stores, or some sort of subscription based download model.

    However, the catch 22 about this is that its the record industry themselves trying to ensure the costs are kept artifically high. If we had the option of X amount of song downloads per month for a flat fee, I think a lot of people would happily pay for it providing we were given DRM free tracks that we could play on our iPods, Phones burn to CDs to listen to etc.


  • Options
    #253
    dbrowne9212
    Registered Users Posts: 98 ✭✭dbrowne9212


    Wincest is best! wrote: »
    However, the catch 22 about this is that its the record industry themselves trying to ensure the costs are kept artifically high. If we had the option of X amount of song downloads per month for a flat fee, I think a lot of people would happily pay for it providing we were given DRM free tracks that we could play on our iPods, Phones burn to CDs to listen to etc.

    aye. smacks of the publicans freezing prices due to the recession. very kind of them i thought. Only problem is lads, what's the difference between price freezeing and price fixing?


  • Options
    #254
    dbrowne9212
    Registered Users Posts: 98 ✭✭dbrowne9212


    does this apply to all copyrighted material or just music files? i.e. movies too?


  • Options
    #255
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,234 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    aidanodr wrote: »
    Some answers maybe:

    "Both parties have agreed to work closely together and on a joint approach aimed at ending “the absue of the internet by P2P (peer to peer) copyright infringers”, they said in a statement afterwards."

    P2P is only part of the problem. Without naming any, File storage sites are littered with zipped downloadable movies and music files. I would say they can only detect the P2P traffic as it is explicit - from one users PC to another users PC direct using such applications as Limewire and Torrent apps.

    Another interesting bit: "As part of the settlement, the record companies will supply Eircom with the IP addresses of all persons who they detect illegally uploading or downloading copyright works"

    The RECORD COMPANIES will SUPPLY Eircom with the IP Addresses, not the other way around, hence these companies have ways of tracking Peer to Peer traffic? Maybe this - http://www.baytsp.com/solutions/index.html

    Aidan
    Is there any way we can take a suit against them for invasion of privacy?


  • Options
    #256
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    velocirafter wrote: »
    I believe I am right in saying that this law only applies to P2P downloading, which to be honest is outdated and flooded with viruses. You should still be free to download using torrents and from storage sites.

    No.
    And it's not just about music.

    The Copyright holders use expert 3rd parties to obtained timestamped IP addresses. This could be for any kind of downloading OR sharing or Both.

    Linux ISO by torrent for various reasons is much less likely to give a false positive than ISP traffic analysis / deep packet inspection.


    Re-read my post in top line of my sig. This doesn't specifically target any method or type of copyright infringement. It doesn't contravene data protection act.

    Making posts here (an Irish Web Site) on how to infringe copyright safely is very likely to be illegal.

    Breathe deeply, keep calm. :)


  • Options
    #257
    lmimmfn
    Registered Users Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭lmimmfn


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Looks like the UK is taking on the pirates with new legislation following in the footsteps of yesterdays Eircom decision.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jan/29/digital-britain-lord-carter-broadband
    and on the other hand the uk's Intellectual Property minister says they'll not legislate on piracy - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7854494.stm


  • Options
    #258
    Winters
    Registered Users Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    dbrowne9212 wrote: »
    aye. smacks of the publicans freezing prices due to the recession. very kind of them i thought. Only problem is lads, what's the difference between price freezeing and price fixing?
    What has the recession got to do with anything?

    Record Industry has always forced digital download supplies like iTunes/Amazon etc. to charge high prices. Why so? We have no idea. Its not their bandwidth costs, its not their manufactoring costs, infact its a hell of a lot cheaper for the record industry to use digital distribution, outsourcing a lot of the cost to web companies, over having to manufactor thusands of CD's themselves.

    A good reason would be they want it cheaper for people to buy CD's than to download [and than illegally burn them onto CD]. They wish to have CD sales high when infact the majority of the market wish to have digital copies for absolute ease of use and trasnferability between all their music devices. The record indistry is doing nothing but trying to ensure they keep their profits high so they can support certain artists lavish lifestyles and line their own pockets.

    The Record Industry are continually doing what they think is right for themselves and not what the consumer wants or the market dictates. Back in the Napster days it could be seen there was a market for digital distribution of audio and the demand was there. They decided against doing what the consumer wanted and market was moving towards and attempted to stomp it out. Nothing has changed for years and it took a lot of work to get to the stage of iTunes and other online audio stores, but by this stage people are used to using alternative methods and the indistry are doing nothing to make people want to change to legal ways as they still are not supporting the consumer but only themselves.

    As it is, its ****, this agreement has been made and its not going to change. But really, by now is there any music you want that you have not got allready? Why not just stop buying CD's? Do whatever you can to give money to the band directly through their gigs/merchandising as opposed to the IRMA/RIAA/Big 4 through CD sales?


  • Options
    #259
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,527 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    velocirafter wrote: »
    I believe I am right in saying that this law only applies to P2P downloading, which to be honest is outdated and flooded with viruses. You should still be free to download using torrents and from storage sites.

    Torrents are Peer2Peer...


  • Options
    #260
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Is there any way we can take a suit against them for invasion of privacy?
    I doubt it, the government will try to wangle it in through some EU "anti terrorism" bill.


    The authorities can freely root through your hard drive by remote access without a warrent if they suspect "terrorist activities".

    Piracy supports terrorism. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #261
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Is there any way we can take a suit against them for invasion of privacy?

    There is no invasion of privacy directly by this.

    There may or may not be in the methods used by 3rd party companies that gather the information. In the past servers have been hacked, root kits and trojans installed via malware links or commercial CDs.

    IPs and dates garnered from a tracker/newsgroup/rapidshare set up by the "3rd parties" have no personal details and inherently are broadcast publicly every time you access anything on the internet in any fashion. Giving that and claiming it was associated with a particular copyrighted file or stream would be hard to argue as an invasion of privacy. Installing a root kit automatically when you play a CD or DVD is an illegal act.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    pcardin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,090 ✭✭✭pcardin


    Ireland has now a most expensive, slowest (except Chorus/NTL) and compleately useless broadband in Europe. I don't believe that people want to spend 40eur monthly for reading texts :)


  • Options
    #263
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    pcardin wrote: »
    Ireland has now a most expensive, slowest (except Chorus/NTL) and compleately useless broadband in Europe. I don't believe that people want to spend 40eur monthly for reading texts :)
    On top of that 3 Mobile GSM have the contract to roll out nationwide broadband, they may as well just roll out 56K. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #264
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    Music Industry body somehow figures out your IP being involved in a download of copyrighted material. I guess this is easy enough since one can actually see all their peer's IP adresses while downloading or uploading stuff with a torrent client.

    Then they go to Eircom and say client IP address x.x.x.x which appears to be one of 'your' IP addresses has been a bad boy/girl on 20/01/2009 15:27:06.

    The Eircom goes to their logs and finds that x.x.x.x on 20/01/2009 15:27:06 was assigned to such and such DSL line on such and such a phone line.

    That is all very transparent and all easy enough. Here is where it gets tricky.

    With regards to data protection Eircom can not actually provide the Music Industry body involved with any information on the identity behind that IP. The evidence provided by the music industry body can at best be called circumstancial and in any case this isn't legal proceedings.
    So now Eircom threatens to cancel the service based on circumstancial evidence without any legal backing. A service which may or may not be crucial for myself or my business which may lead to counterclaims.

    Eircom have put themselves on a very slippery slope here and one can only guess why this country and it's network operators have been singled out as an easy target by the music industry. Must be because Ireland has a horrible reputation for being a place where you get whatever you want if you're willing to throw enough money - spend on lawyers, solicitors - at it.

    I don't think they'd get away with it.

    In this day and age internet access is something that has become very fundamental. Not like water and electricity but gettin' there. In terms of ability to run your business or simply being a 21st century being. You couldn't get cut off it because of circumstancial evidence provided by one company to another company outside any legal proceedings. Any legal action against that would stand a very good chance of blowing this agreement away in no time whatsoever.

    On a more serious note, this is a very dangerous thing when companies have agreements between themselves which are effectively creating laws affecting the citizens of a country outside the legislation process of that country. This is the first step into a society where companies try openly to run the country. At least so far they had to follow certain procedures like bribe politicians, lobby the legislation etc.


  • Options
    #265
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    On top of that 3 Mobile GSM have the contract to roll out nationwide broadband, they may as well just roll out 56K. :rolleyes:

    160 masts = 480 sectors
    say a generous AVERAGE sector throughput of 5Mbps.
    = 2400Mbps

    223,000 buildings in NBS I think.
    if 1/4 users are online at peak times and 20% sign up = 11.5k people

    Speed per person = 2400k/11.5 = 208kbps

    But in reality average per sector speed over a 7.2Mbps or 14.4Mbps Rural cell sector is about 1Mbps or less, which would be 42kbps

    They are rolling out wireless dialup, assuming only 11k people of the 223K buildings are online at once. 5%


  • Options
    #266
    ocallagh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,140 ✭✭✭ocallagh


    realcam wrote: »
    Music Industry body somehow figures out your IP being involved in a download of copyrighted material. I guess this is easy enough since one can actually see all their peer's IP adresses while downloading or uploading stuff with a torrent client.

    Then they go to Eircom and say client IP address x.x.x.x which appears to be one of 'your' IP addresses has been a bad boy/girl on 20/01/2009 15:27:06.

    The Eircom goes to their logs and finds that x.x.x.x on 20/01/2009 15:27:06 was assigned to such and such DSL line on such and such a phone line.

    That is all very transparent and all easy enough. Here is where it gets tricky.

    With regards to data protection Eircom can not actually provide the Music Industry body involved with any information on the identity behind that IP. The evidence provided by the music industry body can at best be called circumstancial and in any case this isn't legal proceedings.
    So now Eircom threatens to cancel the service based on circumstancial evidence without any legal backing. A service which may or may not be crucial for myself or my business which may lead to counterclaims.

    Eircom have put themselves on a very slippery slope here and one can only guess why this country and it's network operators have been singled out as an easy target by the music industry. Must be because Ireland has a horrible reputation for being a place where you get whatever you want if you're willing to throw enough money - spend on lawyers, solicitors - at it.

    I don't think they'd get away with it.

    In this day and age internet access is something that has become very fundamental. Not like water and electricity but gettin' there. In terms of ability to run your business or simply being a 21st century being. You couldn't get cut off it because of circumstancial evidence provided by one company to another company outside any legal proceedings. Any legal action against that would stand a very good chance of blowing this agreement away in no time whatsoever.

    On a more serious note, this is a very dangerous thing when companies have agreements between themselves which are effectively creating laws affecting the citizens of a country outside the legislation process of that country. This is the first step into a society where companies try openly to run the country. At least so far they had to follow certain procedures like bribe politicians, lobby the legislation etc.

    this^^

    plus, as long as the technology/hardware provided by eircom to provide wireless connectivity can be hacked (which I have heard is easily done), they can't say without doubt that the owner of the account was the culprit. As long as their customers will be held accountable for activity on the IP assigned to them, then Eircom MUST have a responsibility to ensure that IP address is 100% secure. That is not the case right now.

    Also, I remember our first broadband package from eircom came with wireless security turned off by default. I can only imagine thousands of accounts out there have no security.

    This is going to be an absolute mess for Eircom and their customers. I remember sitting in a cafe in Ranelagh with my laptop and had access to 3 or 4 unsecured private networks. So essentially with this new rule (and if I was bothered) I could put warnings on all these accounts and potentially close them down????/ LOLOL


  • Options
    #267
    Boskowski
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    ocallagh wrote: »
    This is going to be an absolute mess for Eircom and their customers. I remember sitting in a cafe in Ranelagh with my laptop and had access to 3 or 4 unsecured private networks. So essentially with this new rule (and if I was bothered) I could put warnings on all these accounts and potentially close them down????/ LOLOL

    That's what I meant with the evidence being circumstancial.

    I remember fixing the wireless broadband of a friend of mine 'cos it went off every night around 9. Reason was his neighbour went to bed every night around that time and this neighbour switched everything off in his house :D

    And my friends broadband was set up by an NTL 'technician'. Turns out half the estate had the same wireless router all with default setups and no security. So who surfed on whose internet access was anyones guess.


  • Options
    #268
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,059 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    I just emailed Eircom with some questions regarding all of this.
    Dear Sir/Madam,

    I have some questions regarding the recent decision taken by Eircom to disconnect people accused of file-sharing,

    * My first question is an important one, I underlined the word accused in my opening sentence because it seems that accusations of infringement qualify for evidence in this case, is that a fair assumption? Are the accusations made by the IFPI a solid indication of guilt? Will Eircom independently investigate claims before taking action against accused customers?

    * If an individual is downloading an apparent copyrighted file, will it be considered infringement even if the file is not 100% downloaded. I don't see how this would be possible since it isn't really infringement unless the media is in possession of an individual. A file that is not fully downloaded is therefore not considered to be "in the persons possession".

    * Will Eircom release any personally identifiable information on it's customers to any party involved in the policing/enforcent of Copyright Laws? If so, will Eircom tell it's customers of any such disclosures?

    * Will the reported IP numbers be dealt with on a "per IP" bases or a "per user" bases? Meaning, will Eircom enforce any warning/ban on singular (perhaps dynamic) IPs, or will you enforce any legislation on the individual, thus keeping records of, and perhaps releasing personal records of dynamic IP usage?


    My final question is more of a personal one,

    Why did Eircom decide to give into a faceless organization instead of stand by it's loyal customers and do everything in their power to protect the people that keep the company afloat?
    Other ISPs in other nations have done the latter, with no detrimental effects. It's a slap in the face to the people that chose Eircom as their ISP. I'm sure that a great deal of internet savvy users will be ditching Eircom over this. Eircom has passed on the chance to gain popularity with it's users by not standing up for their Anonymity, Privacy and Freedom online.

    Hopefully my concerns, which are shared by many will be addressed.

    Kindest Regards,

    Me

    I'll post the reply, if I get one.


  • Options
    #269
    niceirishfella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,538 ✭✭✭niceirishfella


    Upward Spiral wrote: »
    I just emailed Eircom with some questions regarding all of this.



    I'll post the reply, if I get one.


    IF......................:pac:


  • Options
    #270
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    realcam wrote: »
    Music Industry body somehow figures out your IP being involved in a download of copyrighted material. I guess this is easy enough since one can actually see all their peer's IP adresses while downloading or uploading stuff with a torrent client.

    Then they go to Eircom and say client IP address x.x.x.x which appears to be one of 'your' IP addresses has been a bad boy/girl on 20/01/2009 15:27:06.

    The Eircom goes to their logs and finds that x.x.x.x on 20/01/2009 15:27:06 was assigned to such and such DSL line on such and such a phone line.

    That's exactly what will happen, yes.
    realcam wrote: »
    With regards to data protection Eircom can not actually provide the Music Industry body involved with any information on the identity behind that IP.

    eircom (or any other ISP who agrees to this too) will not be giving any information to the music companies. The music companies want eircom to deal with it themselves. eircom could, and have in the past, given the details over on foot of a court order. This is not being mentioned this time though, and I would hope it doesn't come back to that.

    realcam wrote: »
    The evidence provided by the music industry body can at best be called circumstancial and in any case this isn't legal proceedings.
    So now Eircom threatens to cancel the service based on circumstantial evidence without any legal backing. A service which may or may not be crucial for myself or my business which may lead to counterclaims.

    As of yet, we don't know exactly what action eircom might take. What has been said, is that you'll be warned. If you are warned, and you are sharing music, then you can simply stop. Problem solved.

    If you are given a warning, and you do not share music, then you can let eircom know this. They will be able to check their own logs, and see whether you were using P2P at the given time. This won't be able to say what exactly you were doing, as identifying the packets would require more work, but it would back up the claim by the music companies.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    pcardin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,090 ✭✭✭pcardin


    Upward Spiral wrote: »
    I just emailed Eircom with some questions regarding all of this.



    I'll post the reply, if I get one.

    Only reply you will get is a new bill with immediate payment required :D


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement