Slashdot Mirror
ISP Sued By Irish RIAA
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "An ISP in Ireland has been sued by the Big Four record labels because its subscribers have engaged in P2P sharing of the record companies' song files. The record companies claim the ISP should be buying Audible Magic's CopySense, the software being peddled by the RIAA's expert witness, which supposedly would filter out copyright infringement. Of course, not everyone agrees."
Well, they wouldn't be the first to try it... http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/03/26/1431258.shtml
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Of course they paid for them. It's a public library, paid for through municipal taxes and whatever endowment scheme your local library uses to supplement that tax income.
The materials in the libraries are all duly licensed for lending, through a combination of statutory exceptions in the US Code, and, where applicable or gapped, through licensing with the copyright holders permitting such use.
The copyright holders have indeed been compensated, both through license payments from libraries (often on DVDs and CDs and similar materials by acquiring the more-expensive rental copies [which often include media replacement]) and through the inherent copyright law bargain.
Incidentally, many library collections include video and audio content licensed for commercial use, which is a great way for a community organization (say, a church or club) to put on such a performance without having to buy a license or negotiate one with the rightsholders. You just check out the video with the commercial license and you're good to go. Your tax dollars at work, literally.
The organisation is IRMA, the Irish Recorded Music Association http://www.irma.ie/index2.htm Their website mentions other legal actions taken against file sharers.
Also ironic in this instance. The ISP involved is the former state telco Eircom, which the govt. screwed up the privitisation of such that they have a monopoly on last-mile, exchanges, etc. and have ensured LLU and DSL reselling is not something other telcos can make money out of (the few "players" in that game are just spending millions to "buy" customer base, with a step 2: ... before step 3: profit).
Actually, I would probably classify Eircom as vastly more evil than the Irish version of the RIAA (IRMA - Irish Recorded Music Association).
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
Digital Rights Ireland is campaigning against this.
Excerpt:
Privacy
This technology will result in ISPs being obliged to monitor everything internet users do â" in effect, acting as private censors for all users without any warrant or even mere suspicion that a particular user is doing something wrong. If the music industry has evidence that a particular person is sharing copyrighted files then they can and already do take action against that person. If they do not have that evidence then they should not be demanding that ISPs monitor innocent users.
Cost
Estimates based on other jurisdictions suggest that, if successful, this action will cost Eircom at least â3,300,000 per year â" which will be reflected in higher costs for Irish broadband subscribers. It is remarkable that the music industry â" private, profit making companies â" now seek to have Irish broadband users pay for the costs of its enforcement. (This figure is based on the Belgian case Sabam v. Tiscali where it was found that using Audible Magic to filter would cost approximately â6 per user per year. Eircom has approximately 560,000 broadband subscribers. Of course, this may be a complete underestimate of the costs if Eircom has to redesign its network to facilitate monitoring.)
Overblocking
This filtering technology is not perfect. Some copyrighted files will slip through the net. But more worryingly, many perfectly legitimate files are likely to be blocked. Files that are out of copyright, excerpts used for documentary purposes, even home videos where music is playing in the background â" all of these are likely to be blocked by this technology, infringing freedom of expression.
Damage to Irish knowledge economy
This action will harm Irelandâ(TM)s reputation as a web- and internet friendly country. By requiring companies to police the actions of their users â" a duty which they are not subject to in other jurisdictions such as the US â" it will harm inward investment and encourage technology firms to relocate elsewhere.
Futility
The music industryâ(TM)s proposal is technically very easy to circumvent. If implemented, Irish file sharers will simply move to encrypted peer to peer systems, which are impossible for the ISP to monitor. This will completely negate any benefit of the system while still leaving Irish consumers to pay its costs.
Function creep
Once a system is in place to monitor internet users and prevent them from transmitting certain things, what other interests might like to take advantage of it? Who else might like to block certain files? The Church of Scientology, for example, has a track record of trying to silence criticism by claiming that its copyright has been infringed, while the makers of electronic voting machines have also abused copyright law to try to conceal flaws in their technology.
Link:
http://www.digitalrights.ie/2008/03/11/irma-v-eircom-why-isp-filtering-for-the-music-industry-is-a-bad-idea/
Regrettably this may start a flame war, but the difference is as follows:
IRMA (Irish Recorded Music Association) is using bully-boy legal tactics to attempt to enforce their will on others.
The IRA uses/used guns and bombs against UK troops and civilians to attempt to enforce their will on others.
Should the IRMA 'get' their target, their target may have to pay a substantial fine.
Should the IRA 'get' their target, the target was dead, lost limbs or was otherwise disabled or disfigured for life.
Have a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
Yeah, there's a difference alright.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful