Eircom to cut broadband over illegal downloads - READ POST#1 WARNING

dub45

zerks wrote: »

Was doing a bit of looking online into freedom of the internet and found this site.raises some interesting issues.http://www.eff.org/

And so does this:

http://www.elon.edu/pendulum/Story.aspx?id=830

Jev/N

FFS, again, the amount of mis-information is astounding! This is mainly addressed to Axer, seeing as you appear to think you know a whole lot about the situation...

First, the Digital Telecoms package was passed in the EU last November, as is due to be implemented here within the next 18 months. That will make the access to internet a right which cannot be removed without full due process - unless in situations of duly justified urgency, like serious crime, terrorism, child pornography. Many posters in this thread haven't a clue of the extent of 'rights' i.e. it's not just the stuff that the UN go on about. It's far from being considered an absolute right but it seems it was brought in to bring a bit of balance about the whole thing - especially where there is the possibility of false positives etc.

It will be interesting to see if the Irish scheme infringes the Directive, I would imagine it will, if all ISPs are on board, leaving no alternative for customers. If all ISPs aren't on board by then, I doubt 3 strikes will still be in force.

axer wrote: »

I'm afraid it does. They are not blanket doing this. This is between each ISP and IRMA.

Second, IRMA have the aim of getting ALL on board with their 'graduated response' programme aka '3 strikes'. They have repeated this in numerous interviews and reports. If compliance isn't forthcoming, they're intending on taking each provider to court, one by one. If it doesn't work out against other ISPs, the protocol is useless and only serves to imbalance competition in the telecoms market. Another thing that the EU don't want is this to have an impact on competition.

axer wrote: »

Wow, it gets worse and worse. Neither Eircom nor IRMA nor DtecNet are jailing, killing, beating, molesting, abusing ..... ANYONE! Please make a distinction. These are not comparable in any way.

I agree; we should also stop comparing copyright infringement to theft.

axer wrote: »

You still don't get it. Nobody is being disconnected for illegally downloading anything. People will be disconnected for ILLEGALLY SHARING content!!!!! I cannot shout it any louder so I hope you hear. Please read what is going on before posting.

Oh and finally, especially for Axer (and quoted from the Eircom website)

"IRMA will provide eircom with notifications containing the IP addresses of the people they detect illegally uploading or downloading music content."

blubloblu

hightower1 wrote: »

I have to say reading Dub45 post he is dead right, this utter c**p of crying human rights is a sickening joke. There are people who are denied their basic human rights on a daily basis, they are hungry, dying and have a miserable existence.....
THIS is a bunch of D4 middle aged complain artists trying to use the same "shield" of human rights violations because they are being told they cant access the bloody internet if they continue to download copyrighted material. Its disgusting that you would compare your removal of net access to the hardships of anyone who using common sense is ACTUALLY denied their human rights. Your sick.

That's a flawed argument. Just because things are much worse elsewhere, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop wrong things happening here.

dub45

That's a flawed argument. Just because things are much worse elsewhere, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop wrong things happening here.

Exactly. People should comply with the terms and conditions that they agree to when they sign up for bb.

axer

Jev/N wrote: »

FFS, again, the amount of mis-information is astounding! This is mainly addressed to Axer, seeing as you appear to think you know a whole lot about the situation...

First, the Digital Telecoms package was passed in the EU last November, as is due to be implemented here within the next 18 months. That will make the access to internet a right which cannot be removed without full due process - unless in situations of duly justified urgency, like serious crime, terrorism, child pornography. Many posters in this thread haven't a clue of the extent of 'rights' i.e. it's not just the stuff that the UN go on about. It's far from being considered an absolute right but it seems it was brought in to bring a bit of balance about the whole thing - especially where there is the possibility of false positives etc.

Ok, basically you are saying that internet access is not recognised as a human right here because no law has been adopted here to say it is? Is that not what I am saying? Internet access is NOT a human right in Ireland so until it is people should stop crying human rights, human rights.

Jev/N wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if the Irish scheme infringes the Directive, I would imagine it will, if all ISPs are on board, leaving no alternative for customers. If all ISPs aren't on board by then, I doubt 3 strikes will still be in force.

That will be a different situation then.

Jev/N wrote: »

Second, IRMA have the aim of getting ALL on board with their 'graduated response' programme aka '3 strikes'. They have repeated this in numerous interviews and reports. If compliance isn't forthcoming, they're intending on taking each provider to court, one by one. If it doesn't work out against other ISPs, the protocol is useless and only serves to imbalance competition in the telecoms market. Another thing that the EU don't want is this to have an impact on competition.

I think you missed my point there. blubloblu said that people were being denied access to the Internet and I was pointing out that nobody is being denied access to the Internet as they are not doing a blanket ban of people's Internet access.

Jev/N wrote: »

I agree; we should also stop comparing copyright infringement to theft.

Both sides are going to extremes. I have said this earlier in the thread. Copyright infringement might not directly equate to theft but it does have an impact on sales etc.

Oh and finally, especially for Axer (and quoted from the Eircom website)

Jev/N wrote: »

"IRMA will provide eircom with notifications containing the IP addresses of the people they detect illegally uploading or downloading music content."

Well I can tell you that IRMA will not be detecting downloading music content as it is impossible to detect - especially for a third party company. I'm sure Eircom could setup something to do this but there does not seem to be any plans to do this. I believe they put in the word downloading because many people do not understand that when they download via torrents they are actually uploading aswell.

z0oT

dub45 wrote: »

And so does this:

http://www.elon.edu/pendulum/Story.aspx?id=830

Article wrote:

The recording industry has suffered greatly. According to the Institute of Policy Innovation, “projected losses from illegal downloading worldwide to U.S. record companies are at $3.7 billion.”

http://torrentfreak.com/us-government-told-piracy-losses-are-exaggerated-100616/

And one with the opposite viewpoint on the whole file sharing debacle.
http://torrentfreak.com/rednex-diss-record-labels-partner-with-the-pirate-bay-100107/

dub45

z0oT wrote: »

http://torrentfreak.com/us-government-told-piracy-losses-are-exaggerated-100616/

And one with the opposite viewpoint on the whole file sharing debacle.
http://torrentfreak.com/rednex-diss-record-labels-partner-with-the-pirate-bay-100107/

And no doubt you noted that in the last one you quote it is the band who are making the choice about their music not having it made for them by people who have no right to do so?

jay93

jay93 wrote: »

MOD EDIT: Typing ALL CAPS doesn't make you big and clever, since I can't be arsed changing it all to lower case its been removed

i was on a old computer when typing that message and caps where on sorry!!

jay93

blubloblu wrote: »

That's a flawed argument. Just because things are much worse elsewhere, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop wrong things happening here.

totally agree with you there.the irish people just sit back and take the cr4p from these companys no one will stand up anymore to them this country has turned into a hole like the united states where corporations run the country are we going to let this happen here?? tbh im happy i left eircom i never downloaded illegal music i would listen to some tunes on youtube or something.but the taught of a monitor on the net worries me and its complete bull.. they are money hungry freeks who have billions of euros if not more and them worried about a few measly downloaded tracks??people still buy alot of cd's so its not as if they are loosing out on money this is just stupid !!

has anyone actually got a warning from eircom at all for downloading music??

z0oT

dub45 wrote: »

And no doubt you noted that in the last one you quote it is the band who are making the choice about their music not having it made for them by people who have no right to do so?

That I did.

z0oT

jay93 wrote: »

has anyone actually got a warning from eircom at all for downloading music??

Well apparently 800 or so people have received their first "warning" thus far, I don't think anyone who's got a "warning" has posted here as of yet.

RangeR

RangeR wrote:

The simple fact of the matter is that eircom [or ISP of choice] can terminate your contract at any time, usually by giving 30 gays notice.

dub45 wrote: »

Surely there has to be an easier way than that!:D

Yeah, let's just call that a "whoopsie daisy" :eek:

Jev/N

axer wrote: »

Ok, basically you are saying that internet access is not recognised as a human right here because no law has been adopted here to say it is? Is that not what I am saying? Internet access is NOT a human right in Ireland so until it is people should stop crying human rights, human rights.

I am saying that the Directive in it's current state is not directly applicable to Ireland as they allow the Member State to implement it, but it is due to be implemented in the next year or so. In the mean time, it could be invoked in a court case if required by a party.

axer wrote: »

I think you missed my point there. blubloblu said that people were being denied access to the Internet and I was pointing out that nobody is being denied access to the Internet as they are not doing a blanket ban of people's Internet access.

I agree they're not being banned, but if they aren't able to connect to another ISP, they are effectively left without a connection to the network.

axer wrote: »

Both sides are going to extremes. I have said this earlier in the thread. Copyright infringement might not directly equate to theft but it does have an impact on sales etc.

I know, it's ridiculous on both sides, but that's the way these things go I suppose. I often equate this 'war' to the US 'War on Drugs' - something that was recently given up on; a result I can forsee in this area at some point in the not too distant future.
Regarding impact on sales, it has damaged sales, without doubt, but digital distribution (legally) without ever any illegal sharing, would have had an impact anyways (obviously not to such an extent). This is why they fcuked up in getting their own system going; they wanted to hold on to the golden era of physical sales, which was slowly fading from what they had known for 30+ years. On top of that, there are so many contradictory reports regarding statistics.

axer wrote: »

Well I can tell you that IRMA will not be detecting downloading music content as it is impossible to detect - especially for a third party company. I'm sure Eircom could setup something to do this but there does not seem to be any plans to do this. I believe they put in the word downloading because many people do not understand that when they download via torrents they are actually uploading aswell.

Well you've answered your own point there. You can begin uploading during downloading and you can be detected - you might not have even attained the full track and you are caught, therefore I would see that as downloading. I know it is the 'uploading' that is being detected, but the point is that most of this 'graduated response' scheme is being focused on bittorrent programs so it makes little difference.

RocketFalls

People will find a way around this. An ineffective method at best. As somebody else has said before, only lawyers and record companies stand to gain from it. Little of this actually filters down to the artists.

They ought to take their cues from Radiohead and start releasing material on the In Rainbows basis.

Cryos

axer wrote: »

Well I can tell you that IRMA will not be detecting downloading music content as it is impossible to detect - especially for a third party company. I'm sure Eircom could setup something to do this but there does not seem to be any plans to do this. I believe they put in the word downloading because many people do not understand that when they download via torrents they are actually uploading aswell.

Its not impossible, infact its as easy as tracking what someone uploads. If you track what someone uploads your also tracking a simultanious download and in many cases it is the people who download are most often caught due to the way various technologies do work for the transmission of data.

z0oT

Jev/N wrote: »

I know, it's ridiculous on both sides, but that's the way these things go I suppose. I often equate this 'war' to the US 'War on Drugs' - something that was recently given up on; a result I can forsee in this area at some point in the not too distant future.
Regarding impact on sales, it has damaged sales, without doubt, but digital distribution (legally) without ever any illegal sharing, would have had an impact anyways (obviously not to such an extent). This is why they fcuked up in getting their own system going; they wanted to hold on to the golden era of physical sales, which was slowly fading from what they had known for 30+ years. On top of that, there are so many contradictory reports regarding statistics.

One has to wonder what crybaby tune the Entertainment industry will be playing in say 10 years time, if they force every ISP in the world through extortion and intimidation to adapt the elusive "Three Strikes" routine, and the sales of physical media continue to decline.

dub45

z0oT wrote: »

One has to wonder what crybaby tune the Entertainment industry will be playing in say 10 years time, if they force every ISP in the world through extortion and intimidation to adapt the elusive "Three Strikes" routine, and the sales of physical media continue to decline.

Extortion and intimidation?

axer

Cryos wrote: »

Its not impossible, infact its as easy as tracking what someone uploads. If you track what someone uploads your also tracking a simultanious download and in many cases it is the people who download are most often caught due to the way various technologies do work for the transmission of data.

It is no where as easy as tracking uploads. There is just too much to prove. Ultimately you would have to seize the infringers computer to prove they have the audio track and that it is playable whereas uploading/sharing the file gives the possibility of proving the infringer is distributing the audio track without permission. Massive difference.

Cryos

axer wrote: »

It is no where as easy as tracking uploads. There is just too much to prove. Ultimately you would have to seize the infringers computer to prove they have the audio track and that it is playable whereas uploading/sharing the file gives the possibility of proving the infringer is distributing the audio track without permission. Massive difference.

Thats incorrect.

You forget that you have to request a master site over non encrypted port 80, most browsers will submit search data in the form of a URL which is then processed back to the computer. All any company would have to do is submit a torrent file say "A-Team Screenrip HD" run on a custom tracker, wait; The tracker would then have a pile of ip addresses; This by various public methods can be cross checked against a whois list whereby you get the ISP.

Once gone to the ISP with the evidence that little jimmy tried to download the A-Team it is possible to get a history of requests from a customers usage history.

The above method has been used very sucsessfully for a number of years now by record lables henchmen (i.e 3rd party companies) to catch people who torrent.

So, either way you can track who downloads what or who uploads what. Dont forget, everything thats downloaded has to be processed by either an appliance / server located in the ISP's data center which has to be logged and monitored.

Ive used this method Professionally to track Software that has been shared (Downloaded and Uploaded) illigally for the company who i work for, so it works and there is plenty of articles on the web on how the labels and large movie shops have used it to catch people.

A simular strategy can be adopted for the Limewires etc of the world.

z0oT

dub45 wrote: »

Extortion and intimidation?

Threatening all the ISPs here, (swing our way or we'll take you to court) and in other countries is a pretty good example of the latter. Admittedly the former probably only applies to end users, ie. the whole "Pay Up or Else" scheme. Nonetheless said industry is guilty of both by the bucketload.

axer

Cryos wrote: »

Thats incorrect.

you may be able to show that a person requested an audio file but how do you prove they downloaded it fully? Eircom are just sending out letters they are not helping in the actual tracking or actively tracking internet usage. So how does a 3rd party do this? It is not possible without the isp's help.

blubloblu

axer wrote: »

you may be able to show that a person requested an audio file but how do you prove they downloaded it fully? Eircom are just sending out letters they are not helping in the actual tracking or actively tracking internet usage. So how does a 3rd party do this? It is not possible without the isp's help.

Bittorent clients report how many more pieces they need to the tracker (and other peers, which would include Dtecnet), this shows if they have completed the download. In fact, it would be harder to show that they have uploaded a copy of the work.

Cryos

axer wrote: »

you may be able to show that a person requested an audio file but how do you prove they downloaded it fully? Eircom are just sending out letters they are not helping in the actual tracking or actively tracking internet usage. So how does a 3rd party do this? It is not possible without the isp's help.

Can you show me where it shows that it states that you must downlaoded it fully; It does not quantify a.) A completely downlaoded file or b.) a methodology in which it is downloaded. It is completely open for interpretation, if anyone has worked with companies with Policies that are open to intepretation it is a nightmare and especially when it comes to Legalities it generally is biased towards things that are illigal.

Exactly the 3rd party doesnt send you the letter Eircom Does. It doesnt qualify your argument that you cant be tracked; Yes you can and its not impossible. In this agreement you simply are not hauled off to court, instead you get turfed off the eircom network.

El Camino

It looks like this third party which carries out a 'scan' of the network is simply setting up a 'honeytrap' by placing certain tracks for download on a given P2P site and simply tracking the IP address of those who download one of these tracks (or part thereof).

THey then send this IP address to Eircom who issue the 3 strikes letter. I'm really not sure if there is anything more intelligent to it than that.
Has anyone got an update as to how IRMA's court action is going against UPC. The fact is that if the Music Industry are successful in this action then all ISP's will be forced into adopting a similar approach to this as Eircom or whatever else may be fored upon UPC.

Government aren't helping the case either. They could simply chose to legislate on this and have everybody on an even playing field. This would surely provide greater rights and protections for consumers. This is the approach being taken in other jurisdictions, which may not have been correct first time around, but it looks like it is being worked out in UK and France successfully.

Cantona's Collars

France's isp security measures didn't go too well lately,an interesting article here.http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/06/french-isp-provided-anti-p2p-tool-has-gaping-security-hole.ars

johanz

zerks wrote: »

France's isp security measures didn't go too well lately,an interesting article here.http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/06/french-isp-provided-anti-p2p-tool-has-gaping-security-hole.ars

Who will install this on their computers anyway? It's even more stupid than a porn filter.

Cantona's Collars

FAIL:D:D:D:D eircom will probably try and sell it in a bundle

Dr Hfuhruhurr

z0oT wrote: »

Well apparently 800 or so people have received their first "warning" thus far, I don't think anyone who's got a "warning" has posted here as of yet.

I got two warnings in the space of a couple of hours for downloading 2 Tv shows....check out the portion of the email they sent me .:mad:


eircom has agreed to work with the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA) to combat illegal music sharing. We want to make you aware of this activity and assist you to use your broadband service to enjoy digital music legitimately.

Many music files are protected by copyright and while it may be acceptable for you to store them personally on your computer for personal use, it is unlawful to share those files without the copyright owner's permission. In the terms and conditions of your broadband service, you have agreed not to use your broadband service to create, host or transmit material, which infringes among other things the copyright of another person or organisation (see www.eircom.net/termsandconditions).

IRMA on behalf of its members has notified eircom of illegal peer to peer (P2P) file sharing using eircom internet protocol (IP) addresses. eircom records have identified one of those IP addresses as being linked to use from your eircom broadband account. Some of the details of the notification supplied by IRMA are set out below and can be viewed online at www.eircom.net/legalmusic.

Timestamp of report:22:46 03/07/2010

Track details: Files downloaded through third party website (Hotfile.com)

Hellrazer

Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote: »

I got two warnings in the space of a couple of hours for downloading 2 Tv shows....check out the portion of the email they sent me .:mad:

What has downloading TV shows got to do with IRMA.I thought these warnings were for music and/or movies.

I`d often download a TV show if Ive missed an episode.I honestly didnt think TV shows would raise the attention of IRMA/eircom.

yoyo

Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote: »

I got two warnings in the space of a couple of hours for downloading 2 Tv shows....check out the portion of the email they sent me .:mad:


eircom has agreed to work with the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA) to combat illegal music sharing. We want to make you aware of this activity and assist you to use your broadband service to enjoy digital music legitimately.

Many music files are protected by copyright and while it may be acceptable for you to store them personally on your computer for personal use, it is unlawful to share those files without the copyright owner's permission. In the terms and conditions of your broadband service, you have agreed not to use your broadband service to create, host or transmit material, which infringes among other things the copyright of another person or organisation (see www.eircom.net/termsandconditions).

IRMA on behalf of its members has notified eircom of illegal peer to peer (P2P) file sharing using eircom internet protocol (IP) addresses. eircom records have identified one of those IP addresses as being linked to use from your eircom broadband account. Some of the details of the notification supplied by IRMA are set out below and can be viewed online at www.eircom.net/legalmusic.

Timestamp of report:22:46 03/07/2010

Track details: Files downloaded through third party website (Hotfile.com)

Hotfile is not peer to peer, this is a fake email, Eircon are not monitoring file hosts

Nick