Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Irish Supreme Court Upholds 3-Strikes Rule For Copyright Violation

Posted by timothy on from the power-of-green dept.

An anonymous reader writes with this news from The Irish Times: "'The Supreme Court [Wednesday] upheld a challenge by four music companies to a notice of the Data Protection Commissioner which they feared would effectively unwind their 'three strikes and you're out' agreement with Eircom aimed at combating the widespread illegal downloading of music.' In the ruling it was found the original High Court trial judge correctly concluded there was 'a complete absence of reasons' and therefore, the notice was unlawful and made in breach of Section 10.4 of the Data Protection Acts. Makes you wonder whether the High Court would have upheld it, had the Data Commissioner given reasons ... which seemed quite justified: 'In September 2011, the Commissioner told Eircom the complainant subscriber had restated his original complaint and alleged Eircom's monitoring of his internet use breached his data protection rights.'"

11 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. tl;dr It's Guinness Time by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The big Irish ISP Eircom monitored subscribers at the behest of Big Media. After a complaint, a Commissioner determined that ISP customers had to consent to such monitoring, so it was halted. Big Media went crazy, took it to court, won a victory, faced an appeal, then the High Court found (on very narrow, legalistic terms) that the Commissioner had not given proper reasoning for WANTING TO PROTECT THE FREEDOM, LIBERTY, AND PRIVACY OF EIRCOM CUSTOMERS, and so was therefore wrong. Big Media wins again.

    This is going to take quite a few Giuinesses (and maybe quite a few Old Bushmills too) to rid Eircom customers of the bad taste.

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re:tl;dr It's Guinness Time by jalet · · Score: 2

      Many thanks for the translation into something that can be understood !

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    2. Re:tl;dr It's Guinness Time by Xest · · Score: 2

      So the question is if the Information Commissioner now blocks it again and gives reasons this time will the whole case have to start over?

      If big media only won on narrow terms then that surely implies they only won again a very narrow circumstance too? It doesn't sound like the judge has ruled on the validity of the information commissioner's underlying claim, just that the specific claim put forward wasn't valid without reason. Put it forward with reason and that implies a new case would be required on the validity of the reasons themselves no?

  2. I'm beginning to wonder... by mitcheli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which is more serious, the traditional high crimes like murder and rape, or illegally copying a DVD.

    --
    Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
    1. Re:I'm beginning to wonder... by Zemran · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Under current law, if you saw someone raping a 9 year old and took a photo to send, using the internet, to the police as evidence, you would get longer in prison that the rapist. The world has gone PC mad and does not look like changing.

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    2. Re:I'm beginning to wonder... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      Under current law, if you saw someone raping a 9 year old and took a photo to send, using the internet, to the police as evidence, you would get longer in prison that the rapist.

      would, or might possibly, if the law was applied unreasonably?

      Considering you can go to prison for life for rape, I think your statement requires more justification. Can you possibly get life for transmitting CP, and would you actually get life for doing so in the course of reporting a crime?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    3. Re:I'm beginning to wonder... by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The answer is easy and based on a simple question: What causes more economic loss to a corporation? Rape? Or illegally copying a DVD.

      You expect crimes to be judged by humane reasons while they are judged by economic reasons. You're just applying a different "morale" than the people who actually have the power to take decision in the present world.

      You probably also believe that all people should be equal, but you live in a world that clearly disagrees and believes people are valued by their economic value (both possessions and influence in the economy).

      In some centuries, humans will have stories about the dark ages where the humans were judged by their economic value, just as we do about the times where they were judged by birthright or, even before, by brute force.

      And these humans will probably live in a society with it's set of flaws, to be corrected in the further future.

      The only important objectives, as a society, are to survive and to improve. As long as we're doing both, everything's fine.

  3. Not So Free Market by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Assuming several ISPs are being roped into these agreements one way or another it's still up to the consumer to vote with their feet.

    I for one am quite interested in how many subscribers will simply leave or terminate immediately when threats to cut off their internet are made (1st strike 2nd etc)
    Imagine your child downloads some stuff and all of a sudden there's a risk that your favorite internet movie streaming service is cut off. Will you put up with ISPs that do this?
    Somewhere out there is an ISP small enough or honorable enough to protect its' customers.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    1. Re:Not So Free Market by Thanshin · · Score: 2

      It will be hilarious when someone makes a trojan that accesses file sharing services and leaves the entire country without a connection.

      Additional hilarity will ensue when that "someone" is found to be someone related to an new alternative ISP.

      And the final belly shaking laughter will come when people start getting popups that explain that unless they send some money to a certain account their internet connection will be cut.

  4. common carrier status by stiggle · · Score: 2

    If the ISP is actively monitoring the information carried and acting upon it, then surely they should lose their common carrier status and be liable for damages.

    eg. Why only monitor & block copyright sites and not trojan/malware sites?

  5. Use the legal system to your benefit (they do) by xtal · · Score: 2

    Just VPN to another juristiction.

    It is a privacy tax, of sorts, but there are all sorts of affordable options. It's not going to give you complete anonymity, of course, but what it does most certainly give you is a very effective adminstrative and legal barrier for anyone attempting to sue you to deal with.

    Sooner or later someone will launch a satellite for this purpose..

    --
    ..don't panic