Eircom enacts three strikes rule

tiocimarla

pretentiouslad wrote: »

I've read the whole thread, I've seen the exchanges between Amhran Nua, TBH and Marc200...

At this point i'd like to commend the latter two for the amount of patience they've shown in dealing with Amhran Nua, a guy who clearly can't differentiate between Law and company policy no matter how many different ways it's put to him...

I'll only post on this thread once so don't expect a reply, not because I can't engage in debate or defend my opinions, but because I have exams and a life. Amhran Nua, you have shown extreme stubborness, there's nothing wrong with being wrong, let it go...

I'll try and explain it one time as clearly as
i can:


Eircom have put in place a 3 strike system where illegal downloading or uploading won't be tolerated... criticism of this is, in reality, a criticism of upholding the law... 3 strikes for illegal activity is quite generous... when you share files you're breaking copyright laws, a judge deemed that if eircom is aware of people doing this on "their watch" that eircom would have to do something to stop it, same way as if a barman saw 14 year olds drinking in a pub he'd be required to throw them out or at least not serve them anymore... not getting the gaurds involved just simply refusing a service because the people are clearly breaking the law... you may poke holes in the analogy, but in fairness, just because the offences occur in cyberspace does not mean that they aren't "real" crimes... there is no point in complaining here really...

Also, Marc200 and TBH explained it to you quite well repeatedly and you're responses were repetitive and a failure to grasp the basics of the topic was clear on your behalf...

Amhran Nua means new song, but you've been singing the same song for your 42 posts :rolleyes:

I'm an objective observer, you're being a tool, how insecure do you have to be to not allow people to poke holes in your logic??? :pac:

Well im not getting wrapped up in this thread again coz Il admit I Some people here obviously no more about
1. Telecoms Package.
2. EU parliments views and stand on this.
3. (American) 3rd parties right to monitor Eircoms customers(even if it is only fifty and I no its they arent planting bugs around your house before ye start being smart)

My view on this is simple even if your not pirating stuff, If eircom want to view your Internet time so be it. I dont believe that American lawyers constitute a right to bully another country into observing their internet usage and being the judge and jury as to who is breaking the law or not.

I think where everyone is getting crossed wires is, the Law V Policy thing.
Its two different oppinions and everyone seems to be adopting one or the other(anyone with a valuble oppinion that is)

Yes it is and Eircom company policy BUT it has been bullied into a corner with the threat of sueing which is fair enough. Therefore some people believe Eircom have no choice. Everyone has a choice and each choice has its consiquences.

Now the third party and Law thing. The other side is saying that this group that will provide IPs to Eircom is being a law onto themselves. They choose WHO BREAKING THE LAW. Now it is in my strong view that the only body that can choose who breaks the law or not Is

1. A judge
2. A jury

Now people can have different views piracy bla bla. But at the end of the day this group IS bypassing the judicial system.

If Eircom sends you a letter stating Strike 1. You have broken copyrite laws through Illegal Downloading/Uploading. Then this leads to the question of who has found you guilty of BREAKING THE LAW! Hmmm must be some sort of legislation in place here and i have been caught by legal means. Nope its simply a shower of lawyers from the states that are now enforcing the law. Is it just me or is that the gaurds job.

And for those who are gonna start about policies again, Is it eircoms place to listen to a judge or a third party who has juditial rights in Ireland?

Now like I say I can sit here all day (but I wont) and bring up different Views and oppinions about this subject but i think it is to vast.

So Im gonna Ask the OP to put a poll up asking Do you think that the 3 strick rule is

1. A good direction for the future of the internet?
2. A bad direction for the future of the internet?

Im sure ye could word it better and even have a few more points but im curious of from the people fighting handbags on both sides. Who believes it is a good idea?

I think that a lot of people saying that it has to happen dont really think it should. Again Irish people love to talk about stuff, complain about stuff and voice their oppinions about stuff, but they never do jacks*** about it. I to am guilty of this to a certain extent. We let our government walk all over us and now were letting foreigners have a go. Im gonna get a tatoo on my forehead saying, walk on me im Irish.

Now you vultures, poke away. At my uneducated stupid oppinion.:p

Jumpy

johanz wrote: »

Smart person won't get caught anyway.

Nope because Smart isnt doing the three strikes thingy.

johanz

Jumpy wrote: »

Nope because Smart isnt doing the three strikes thingy.

I saw what you did there :pac:

Tar.Aldarion

wot ded he doo

johanz

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

wot ded he doo

I meant smart people as in intelligent people, and then he named smart as ISP.

flag123

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

What about porn? What will becum of my life without it?

hehe

johanz

Porn doesn't have any groups like RIAA or such protecting it, so fap away.

pretentiouslad

tiocimarla wrote: »

Well im not getting wrapped up in this thread again coz Il admit I Some people here obviously no more about
1. Telecoms Package.
2. EU parliments views and stand on this.
3. (American) 3rd parties right to monitor Eircoms customers(even if it is only fifty and I no its they arent planting bugs around your house before ye start being smart)

My view on this is simple even if your not pirating stuff, If eircom want to view your Internet time so be it. I dont believe that American lawyers constitute a right to bully another country into observing their internet usage and being the judge and jury as to who is breaking the law or not.

I think where everyone is getting crossed wires is, the Law V Policy thing.
Its two different oppinions and everyone seems to be adopting one or the other(anyone with a valuble oppinion that is)

Yes it is and Eircom company policy BUT it has been bullied into a corner with the threat of sueing which is fair enough. Therefore some people believe Eircom have no choice. Everyone has a choice and each choice has its consiquences.

Now the third party and Law thing. The other side is saying that this group that will provide IPs to Eircom is being a law onto themselves. They choose WHO BREAKING THE LAW. Now it is in my strong view that the only body that can choose who breaks the law or not Is

1. A judge
2. A jury

Now people can have different views piracy bla bla. But at the end of the day this group IS bypassing the judicial system.

If Eircom sends you a letter stating Strike 1. You have broken copyrite laws through Illegal Downloading/Uploading. Then this leads to the question of who has found you guilty of BREAKING THE LAW! Hmmm must be some sort of legislation in place here and i have been caught by legal means. Nope its simply a shower of lawyers from the states that are now enforcing the law. Is it just me or is that the gaurds job.

And for those who are gonna start about policies again, Is it eircoms place to listen to a judge or a third party who has juditial rights in Ireland?

Now like I say I can sit here all day (but I wont) and bring up different Views and oppinions about this subject but i think it is to vast.

So Im gonna Ask the OP to put a poll up asking Do you think that the 3 strick rule is

1. A good direction for the future of the internet?
2. A bad direction for the future of the internet?

Im sure ye could word it better and even have a few more points but im curious of from the people fighting handbags on both sides. Who believes it is a good idea?

I think that a lot of people saying that it has to happen dont really think it should. Again Irish people love to talk about stuff, complain about stuff and voice their oppinions about stuff, but they never do jacks*** about it. I to am guilty of this to a certain extent. We let our government walk all over us and now were letting foreigners have a go. Im gonna get a tatoo on my forehead saying, walk on me im Irish.

Now you vultures, poke away. At my uneducated stupid oppinion.:p

In fairness to you, you explained your opinion quite well there...

basically it's company policy being influenced by a third party that isn't the Irish legal system, which is wrong :rolleyes: But, I know nobody will want to defend the Music Industry here, but if the songs being downloaded are property of the Music Industry, surely each time one is downloaded illegally theft has just occurred... and the Music Industry is trying to elliminate theft of it's product by asking Eircom to assist it... Eircom could have stood strong and probably should have, but the Music Industry would claim that since Eircom knowlingly allows it's users to download music illegally that it it has a moral obligation to uphold the laws of the country... and Eircom didn't want to be brought to the courts over it...

I know it's verging on cencorship of what you can and can't view etc, but I'm not entirely against it because it's not too extreme... Basically this is one way of clamping down on illegal downloading, which means people can't indulge on music other people have spent time writing and promoting... If you like an artists song, let them know by paying them to buy it, it's not that complicated...

jimi_t2

Now you vultures, poke away. At my uneducated stupid oppinion.:p

Well...

tiocimarla wrote: »

3. (American) 3rd parties right to monitor Eircoms customers(even if it is only fifty and I no its they arent planting bugs around your house before ye start being smart)

Open up mTorrent. Join a torrent. Open up ''Connections''. Count the Irish flags.

Any of us can do it - only difference is they can mine the IP addresses as a company without running afoul of the data protection act thanks to the ruling.

I dont believe that American lawyers constitute a right to bully another country into observing their internet usage...

Preaching to the choir brother!

I think where everyone is getting crossed wires is, the Law V Policy thing.
Its two different oppinions...

No its not. Its a bunch of people who understand what has happened, and a bunch of people who refuse to back down when proven wrong. Its really very black and white.

Eircom ALWAYS had a clause in their contract that they'd disconnect you for infringing/accessing copyright material. Its just now that they're being forced to honour it.

Yes it is and Eircom company policy BUT it has been bullied into a corner with the threat of sueing which is fair enough. Therefore some people believe Eircom have no choice.

They rolled over when the RIAA agreed that they'd go after Eircom's competitors immediately afterward.

Everyone has a choice and each choice has its consiquences.

Now the third party and Law thing. The other side is saying that this group that will provide IPs to Eircom is being a law onto themselves. They choose WHO BREAKING THE LAW.

Seriously. If you have no idea about what encompasses the Irish legal system and legislature then STOP MAKING DEFINITIVE SWEEPING STATEMENTS IN CAPITAL LETTERS.

Now it is in my strong view that the only body that can choose who breaks the law or not...

Good for you. And a strong view at that!

However, the uneducated layman is not the policy-maker or judicator in this state, thank F*CK!!!!

Now people can have different views piracy bla bla. But at the end of the day this group IS bypassing the judicial system.

Ehm, as the judicial system inherently allows them to do

If Eircom sends you a letter stating Strike 1. You have broken copyrite laws through Illegal Downloading/Uploading. Then this leads to the question of who has found you guilty of BREAKING THE LAW!

F*CKING HELL....

ONE LAST TIME

This is not Law. What they are doing is not breaking the law, either before or after the RIAA got involved.

As part of their COMPANY POLICY, they decided when they started off to include a clause saying that if you accessed copyright material, they'd cut you off. They're perfectly entitled to do so under Irish law dating back quite some bloody time.

They now have a VOLUNTARY EXTRA-JUDICIAL AGREEMENT with IRMA, after the DPC lost its case in the highcourt saying IPs were priviliged information. This was their own decision, and they could well have appealed it in court like UPS are apparently doing, but they chose not to because they're a bunch of c*nts at the end of the day.

BT have been doing it for ages off their own bat, as do plenty of other ISPs. I know a few people who got the phone call basically saying ''Cop on''.

Jev/N

Right, first the facts...

1. The settlement only covers P2P services, it does not cover hosting services such as Rapidshare or music blogs

2. Those who are cut-off (if ever) can just move to another provider, as long as all the ISP's never agree to such a settlement; they're not going to be brought to court and they're not going to be sued. Irma have already said this approach had been very costly and not netting anywhere near the amount they sought.

3. Those who are still with Eircom can just find a way around it, people always have, and will.

4. The EU Bill might have been circumvented by the exceptions contained in the protocol (settlement) relating to medical use, employment etc.. Mr Justice Charlton pointed this out but remained cautious, having not seen an instrument making this effective in Irish law.

Now for the opinion:

This approach is another step in the wrong direction for the music industry and more so, the rightsholders. It's the same attitude as was behind DRM sales, or single label online stores, not giving the customers what they want (within reason, of course) It can't and won't stop people as they will either find a way around the current restrictions and safeguards or they will just move provider.

Eircom and Irma are both relying heavily on other ISPs following suit for this settlement to operate smoothly and, if this fails to happen, the whole thing will just blow up in their faces. More than likely I can see this being abandoned at some future point owing to customers shopping around prior to, or following, disconnection.

As Danny O'Brien exclaimed in an Irish Times article; “Hear that enormous smacking sound? That noise is 100,000 Irish geeks slapping their heads in frustration at another music industry own goal.”


edit: One last thing is why? I would think that the reason Eircom took this route is twofold - avoidance of a protracted 4 week High Court case which could have resulted in them losing and paying costs (although some say that they appeared to have the upper hand all the way through); secondly, if they had lost they might have either been ordered to implement filtering applications (which they feared would damage their services as opposed to achieving the objectives) but more so, that they might be held liable as secondary infringers...
None of these things, however, would lead me to believe that the settlement in the action was actually worthwhile and in their best interests. Particularly due to it's reliance on the other ISPs following suit, something which they have little control over and their competitors see as an open business opportunity.

Oracle

It's a joke, Eircom and the authorities energies would be better used improving the broadband capacity and coverage in Ireland, rather than persecuting broadband users. It's not as if we all have Korean style 100mbps connections, and are guzzling 15Gb HD DVD torrents every minute.

evolutionqy7

on this day and age im happy im with UPC

EDIT: Oh and unlimited downloads/uploads

oceanclub

Oracle wrote: »

It's a joke, Eircom and the authorities energies would be better used improving the broadband capacity and coverage in Ireland, rather than persecuting broadband users. It's not as if we all have Korean style 100mbps connections, and are guzzling 15Gb HD DVD torrents every minute.

Look at this graph:

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/4599/oecdbroadbandspeeds2009.jpg

Secondest slowest speed in the OECD (thank you, Mexico, for saving us from the bottom) and the big international news about Ireland and the 'net is this.

Sure, that's the knowledge economy.

P.

tiocimarla

jimi_t2 wrote: »

ONE LAST TIME

This is not Law. What they are doing is not breaking the law, either before or after the RIAA got involved.

As part of their COMPANY POLICY, they decided when they started off to include a clause saying that if you accessed copyright material, they'd cut you off. They're perfectly entitled to do so under Irish law dating back quite some bloody time.


.

Yes I do understand this is not law. And I understand the company policy of accessing copyrighted material.

So why do the third party still get to rule in their view so to speak who has been accessing copyrighted material. Which is Illegal and against the law thus breaking the law.

If Americans were downloading Irish music and we wanted to tell theyre largest ISP to cut people we wanted cut, what do you think they would say? Thats right, Fnck off!

Listen im not getting into an war of words with ye but if ye listened and respected other peoples views rather than being an arrogant pr1ck then ye might get somewhere.

You should apply for a politicians job because they prefere having a go at each other rather than trying to understand each other too;)

Now onto a thread that people act like people not fact slinging idiots.

Views are not always fact sometimes theyre just views:D

johanz

They can't stop the distributors. Torrent trackers mostly, so they go for the consumer. Simple as that.

Jev/N

johanz wrote: »

They can't stop the distributors. Torrent trackers mostly, so they go for the consumer. Simple as that.

No, they can't stop the consumer (not directly), so they're going for the ISP..

jimi_t2

tiocimarla wrote: »

Yes I do understand this is not law. And I understand the company policy of accessing copyrighted material.

So why do the third party still get to rule in their view so to speak who has been accessing copyrighted material.

They didn't get to rule anything whatsoever as they're not a court. Eircom decided it was in their best interest to comply, and I'm guessing vet the IPs submitted to them; part of the reason that they're processing so few a week. This has nothing to do with a court whatsoever, this is a private agreement between IRMA and Eircom.

Which is Illegal and against the law thus breaking the law.

No, no and no.

I'd ask for the relevant statute so as to prove how indefensible your position is, but there isn't one and you're probably going to be banned anyway.

If Americans were downloading Irish music...

Irish music? The country of Ireland does not hold the rights of the Intellectual property of its citizens.

The vast majority of it is on, you guessed it, American record labels.

Listen im not getting into an war of words with ye but if ye listened and respected other peoples views rather than being an arrogant pr1ck then ye might get somewhere.

You should apply for a politicians job because they prefere having a go at each other rather than trying to understand each other too;)

Now onto a thread that people act like people not fact slinging idiots.

Views are not always fact sometimes theyre just views:D

Do you even read what you say before you post it?

It's hilarious how many people resort to personal abuse when their arguments are shown to have absolutely no basis in fact. As the old saying goes, Opinions are like...

tiocimarla

ok copywrite isnt illegal so. Lets all take everything out of context so. Thats all you have shown in this thread

jimi_t2

tiocimarla wrote: »

ok copywrite isnt illegal so. Lets all take everything out of context so.

That doesn't even make sense.

And its copyright.

johanz

Copyrights suck, fight the powa, row row

Jev/N

The "third party" - DectectNet - are being employed by Irma on behalf of the four record firms.

As Jimi said, it's not just a case of here are the IP addresses and you (Eircom) send out the notifications. Sources at Eircom (in some recent report on RTÉ or in the Irish Times) said they would engage in dialogue etc. and it would not just be an open and shut case.

The first two strikes are automatic, with a min. of 14 days apart. Obviously, if someone received one of these in error, they could dispute it. When it comes round to the 3rd offence, there is a human element and the whole is vetted before a final decision is made.


Where is the illegality you speak of?

Gunsfortoys

Already millions of euro in debt, eircom seek new customers by..........threatening them. Although choice of BB providers is pretty bad in ireland, you got to choose between UPC(ntl) or eircom for decent BB service. I suppose UPC would be the lesser of two evils. Seriously I hope the guys at the top of eircom get sacked for this they are ****ed enough as it is.

johanz

Watch as UPC falls next

Jev/N

johanz wrote: »

Watch as UPC falls next

You really think so...

On what grounds?

evolutionqy7

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Already millions of euro in debt, eircom seek new customers by..........threatening them. Although choice of BB providers is pretty bad in ireland, you got to choose between UPC(ntl) or eircom for decent BB service. I suppose UPC would be the lesser of two evils. Seriously I hope the guys at the top of eircom get sacked for this they are ****ed enough as it is.

Fixed

johanz

Jev/N wrote: »

You really think so...

On what grounds?

Every big isp will get there, sooner or later.
Either they(UPC) accept the new policy or get sued out of their shoes.
Do you think eircom does this only because they think it's a great idea? I don't think so.

blubloblu

UPC are a far bigger company, they're active in a few European countries. They have a strong case, and it's in their interests to protect their customers. Unlike eircom, they're strong enough not to be bullied by IRMA.

johanz

RIAA, IRMA and all other music companies need to die off.
All they do is sue and eat all the money, artists get barely a thing.
Why can't muslims instead of blowing trade centre, blow up IRMA HQ

Pin_Cushion

Does this give me grounds to get out of my contract with Eircom?

I'm only four months in but find their service crappy and overpriced and I don't like how they have blocked pirate bay. Now this. Any ideas?

johanz

Pin_Cushion wrote: »

Does this give me grounds to get out of my contract with Eircom?

I'm only four months in but find their service crappy and overpriced and I don't like how they have blocked pirate bay. Now this. Any ideas?

They actually block websites? That's pathetic and should be a good reason to leave already.

I know piratebay contains a lot of warez, but it also has a lot of legal torrents.

Gunsfortoys

johanz wrote: »

RIAA, IRMA and all other music companies need to die off.
All they do is sue and eat all the money, artists get barely a thing.
Why can't muslims instead of blowing trade centre, blow up IRMA HQ

Yeah Mohammad dosent like to pay for his Britney Cds....:pac:

evolutionqy7

johanz wrote: »

They actually block websites? That's pathetic and should be a good reason to leave already.

I know piratebay contains a lot of warez, but it also has a lot of legal torrents.

oh yeah they do...it shows a big screen with eircom saying that under such and such bull**** thepiratebay.org is not available one more reason UPC is better

johanz

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Yeah Mohammad dosent like to pay for his Britney Cds....:pac:

Who's crazy enough to even listen to that.

Gunsfortoys

johanz wrote: »

Who's crazy enough to even listen to that.

Bin Laden.

johanz

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Bin Laden.

Naah, Bin's a smart man, terrorizing US and all that.

java

Jev/N wrote: »

The first two strikes are automatic, with a min. of 14 days apart. Obviously, if someone received one of these in error, they could dispute it. When it comes round to the 3rd offence, there is a human element and the whole is vetted before a final decision is made.

How do you know? I don't see it published anywhere.

java

Pin_Cushion wrote: »

Does this give me grounds to get out of my contract with Eircom?

I'm only four months in but find their service crappy and overpriced and I don't like how they have blocked pirate bay. Now this. Any ideas?

eircom blocked pirate bay last Sept!

Jev/N

johanz wrote: »

Every big isp will get there, sooner or later.
Either they(UPC) accept the new policy or get sued out of their shoes.
Do you think eircom does this only because they think it's a great idea? I don't think so.

I doubt it TBH, unless they want to themselves... How are they going to get sued out of their shoes? I think you're just plucking random possibilities out of the sky without having any backing? I already said why I think Eircom did this, I won't bother repeating myself. I also said I didn't agree with their choice as I they had the upper hand in the case

java wrote: »

How do you know? I don't see it published anywhere.

The case report from the case dated 16th April

Jev/N

I don't know if this has been quoted here yet but here's the plan (taken from EMI Records & Ors -v- Eircom Ltd [2010] IEHC 108 (16 April 2010))

If anyone is going to bother arguing about this, I believe they should read the case report first, rather than the snippets in the paper

Full report here: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2010/H108.html

13. On the first infringement, the bill payer at the IP address will be told with their bill that an infringement was detected at such and such a time in respect of a particular song, or whatever, that is subject to copyright. This enables them to reflect on their conduct or to communicate with the rest of their household. On a second infringement, a formal letter is received by the customer from Eircom. This is to the same effect, but it will presumably be couched in stronger terms than the warning with the bill. The customer can only go to level 2 after fourteen days have passed since the first infringement. As I understand it, these communications may also contain information concerning how to keep one’s computer secure from, for instance, the person next door and other continuing education tips. When a third infringement notification is received by Eircom from one of the plaintiffs, after a further fourteen days, Eircom must then review all the evidence. This is done on a human basis; the first two levels operating automatically. A termination notice is then issued to the customer giving fourteen days before cut-off. The customer is then entitled to make representations to Eircom, as the internet service provider, over the telephone or through the internet. The user’s representation is considered by Eircom, not in consultation with the plaintiffs, under para. 2.8 of the protocol. Private matters involving extenuating circumstances, so as to call into play one of the exceptions, or material whereby it is claimed as a matter of fact that the infringement has not taken place at all, must be considered by Eircom. Then, if that does not cause the consequences of the protocol to be diverted or postponed, the customer is cut-off from internet service.

java

Jev/N wrote: »

I don't know if this has been quoted here yet but here's the plan (taken from EMI Records & Ors -v- Eircom Ltd [2010] IEHC 108 (16 April 2010))

If anyone is going to bother arguing about this, I believe they should read the case report first, rather than the snippets in the paper

Full report here: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2010/H108.html

Thanks for that. Hadn't seen (or heard!) that it was available online before now.

celtic723

Everyone switch from Eircom. These cnuts deserve nothing but misery. They've clearly no backbone and are willing to be the first isp to crumble.

Fcuk you Eircom you can stick your custom where the shine doesn't shine!

johanz

If only switching was so easy.

Thank god I am not with eircom in the first place.
Also I don't pirate music, only listen to e-radio so these 3 strikes wouldn't apply to me anyway.

celtic723

johanz wrote: »

If only switching was so easy.

Thank god I am not with eircom in the first place.
Also I don't pirate music, only listen to e-radio so these 3 strikes wouldn't apply to me anyway.

It's unbelievably easy. You ring up and say you're sick to your teeth of their abysmal ''service'' and you're taking your custom elsewhere. All done and dusted withing 10 minutes.

Tar.Aldarion

If people have an alternative.

sink

sink wrote: »

The OP is full of shit tbh. The hysteria displayed by the OP and others is quiet hilarious.

Due to the nature of P2P networks anyone who connects to a swarm (i.e. downloads a file), shares their I.P. with everyone else in that swarm. All anyone has to do to gather a list of I.P.'s sharing the latest Britney Spears album is to join the swarm and copy the list of connected peers. You can do this yourself in most clients including uTorrent and Azureus by going into the details tab and looking at peers. This makes it easy for rights holders to gather a list of I.P. downloading their property illegally. They then identify all the eircom I.P.'s pass on all the details and eircom will then decide whether or not to take action. There is little or no chance of anyone downloading a legal distribution being mistaken for a pirate.

Direct download services like Rapidshare and Megaupload don't suffer from the same drawbacks. When you download from them, you are downloading directly from their servers and are not connected to anyone else. No one but Rapidshare and Megaupload can see who is downloading what and so the rights holders have no means of tracking who is downloading illegally.

Downloading from Rapidshare and Megaupload involves making a request to Eircom's DNS servers, of which records may be kept.

Or, they could just save all HTTP requests containing specific hostnames (which are obtained from the DNS server); these also contain the URL of the file you are attempting to get.

johanz

Deleted User wrote: »

Downloading from Rapidshare and Megaupload involves making a request to Eircom's DNS servers, of which records may be kept.

Or, they could just save all HTTP requests containing specific hostnames (which are obtained from the DNS server); these also contain the URL of the file you are attempting to get.

This is why I use opendns, and also because it's faster.
The thing is, copyright holders report IPs to eircom, eircom itself doesn't monitor user activities. So copyright holders have no way to detect your ip if you are downloading straight from a server.

mathie

Jev/N wrote: »

I don't know if this has been quoted here yet but here's the plan (taken from EMI Records & Ors -v- Eircom Ltd [2010] IEHC 108 (16 April 2010))

If anyone is going to bother arguing about this, I believe they should read the case report first, rather than the snippets in the paper

"13. On the first infringement, the bill payer at the IP address will be told with their bill that an infringement was detected at such and such a time in respect of a particular song, or whatever, that is subject to copyright. This enables them to reflect on their conduct or to communicate with the rest of their household. On a second infringement, a formal letter is received by the customer from Eircom. This is to the same effect, but it will presumably be couched in stronger terms than the warning with the bill. The customer can only go to level 2 after fourteen days have passed since the first infringement. As I understand it, these communications may also contain information concerning how to keep one’s computer secure from, for instance, the person next door and other continuing education tips. When a third infringement notification is received by Eircom from one of the plaintiffs, after a further fourteen days, Eircom must then review all the evidence. This is done on a human basis; the first two levels operating automatically. A termination notice is then issued to the customer giving fourteen days before cut-off. The customer is then entitled to make representations to Eircom, as the internet service provider, over the telephone or through the internet. The user’s representation is considered by Eircom, not in consultation with the plaintiffs, under para. 2.8 of the protocol. Private matters involving extenuating circumstances, so as to call into play one of the exceptions, or material whereby it is claimed as a matter of fact that the infringement has not taken place at all, must be considered by Eircom. Then, if that does not cause the consequences of the protocol to be diverted or postponed, the customer is cut-off from internet service. "

Full report here: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2010/H108.html

Professional to the last.

Ciaran500

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

If people have an alternative.

If people can get broadband from Eircom they can get it from any of the resellers too.

johanz

johanz wrote: »

This is why I use opendns, and also because it's faster.
The thing is, copyright holders report IPs to eircom, eircom itself doesn't monitor user activities. So copyright holders have no way to detect your ip if you are downloading straight from a server.

I was pointing out that sink was incorrect in their assertion that "no one but Rapidshare and Megaupload can see who is downloading what and so the rights holders have no means of tracking who is downloading illegally."

If Eircom really wants to, they can log all of your online activities. They can also capture all DNS requests, regardless of what DNS server you use. If you're on their network, all packets pass through their routers. (I'm aware you know all this already, but others might not.)

Just sayin' though. I know they (probably) don't do this and that the copyright holders are the ones giving them IPs.

event

Deleted User wrote: »

I was pointing out that sink was incorrect in their assertion that "no one but Rapidshare and Megaupload can see who is downloading what and so the rights holders have no means of tracking who is downloading illegally."

If Eircom really wants to, they can log all of your online activities. They can also capture all DNS requests, regardless of what DNS server you use. If you're on their network, all packets pass through their routers. (I'm aware you know all this already, but others might not.)

Just sayin' though. I know they (probably) don't do this and that the copyright holders are the ones giving them IPs.

so can every ISP though

Eircom arent doing this

the amount of misinformation in the OP is shocking