Home Forums Business and Legal IRMA take ‘action’ against filesharers

This topic contains 35 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Anonymous 14 years, 3 months ago.

  • Author
  • #3992

  • #19845

  • #19861


    Mmh… Not wanting to appear too boring with legal mumbo-jumbo et al., but there’s at least two major hurdles to this going anywhere in Ireland:

    1) UK case law (previously discussed in the thread in respect of the ongoing ‘City of Heroes/Marvel Comics’ infringement case), which although not binding on IE Courts will in all likelihood be followed as having ‘persuasive character’. Note that US case law does not have such ‘persuasive character’ (thinking here about the current AMPAA litigations), or that it would in any case be much more limited than European decsions.

    2) with regard to ISP ‘leaking’ details of P2P users, the European Human Rights Act under which such passing of information would undoubtedly be found to constitute a breach. Further, Internet connection suppply contracts (of the ISP to the P2P user) may also contain clauses against such disclosure, which the ISP would be breaching if satisfying the IRMA.

    There’s no doubt that obtaining copyrighted material (and/or protected by any other type of IP) under conditions not accepted by the rights owner, e.g. against just retribution (=infringement), should be punishable as intended by Statutes.

    However, bear in mind (and so will Courts) that:
    a) P2P networks do not exist for the sole purpose of exchanging/distributing pirated material.
    b) And ISPs do not provide or administer P2P networks.

    To sum up (and let my cynicisnm break free for a short while) – either the IRMA is paying its’ dues to its American counterpart (i.e. doing it’s bit in it’s respective jurisdiction),
    or they’re just p*ssed at not getting their (full) pound of flesh,
    or they’ve found a convenient excuse/opportunity to blame wrong revenue projections on something else than the weather for a change,
    or they’re scared of having to accomodate their business model in respect of technological adoption increasingly outstripping traditional retail methods (and it’s not as if Amazon hasn’t showed them how it’s done for the past few years, though)
    or any combination of the above…

    I shall follow with interest, and analyze for benefit of the Group/Forum as and when anything further happens – funnily enough, I’ve not heard of this at work through the usual grapevine, but would have expected to, given the topic…

  • #19864


    RTE have given it a mention aswell…

    IMRA had better be carefull with this campaign though, they should know how much the RIAA were vilified after they started taking people to courts in the US. Remember the little girl who downloaded a Britney Spears song in her grandmothers house? :p

  • #19867


    south park put it best when kyle and stan were using napster and swat broke down the door and arrested them.

    “boys since you stole music using napster, puff daddy cant buy that suv for his son for his birthday” or “will smith cant buy an island for his kids”.

    source from script of the epsiode: hilarious.

    Kenny tells them they can download music for free. The boys start downloading music for free until the FBI swoops in and arrests them. The FBI agent takes Kyle, Stan and Kenny and shows them what the impact of their downloading music for free has done. Recording artists are going to be doomed to a life of semi-luxury. Cartman takes Token and Butters to a beach where he shoots the cover for the first album cover for FAITH + 1.

  • #19868


    lol….yeah, I remember that episode!

  • #19874

  • #19875


    isn’t it odd that such associations are still insisting/focusing on sales of musical products through bricks-&-mortar channels (which is what this whole Napster-bashing thing is really all about, IMHO) and not trying to come up with a universally-acceptable delivery method instead?[/quote:cbde8329d3]

    Money. Pure and simple. They wish to continue robbing people by making them pay for overpriced CDs.

  • #19876


    How many people (excluding the development / IT savvy community) do you know have an mp3 player and know how to rip a CD they own into mp3s? [/quote:62c4ed8844]

    that used to be the case but i think with the explosion of ipod being sold in nearly every o2 shop and in the majority of electronic stores, non i.t. folk are getting them, (trendy factor being the be draw). my sister and her husband recently got 1 each, and there as far from it was you can get. pure techno phobes, but times they are a changing:) Similar case with minidisc, they require about as much setting up as mp3 as regards soundstage etc, but no tech people seem to manage just fine.

  • #19878


    But does software that comes with iPods automatically directs non-tech-savvy people to iTunes online, where they can purchase mp3 tracks?

    (I don’t have an iPod so don’t really know the specifics, I like my portable entrtainment ‘complete’ so I’ve got an ARCHOS AV420 :D)

    i.e. (puting aside my CD-ripping rethorical question) it’s a neat all-in-one package, not conceptually different from ‘always going to your favourite/local HMV/Virgin (but online)’

    This is the kind of user-friendly, ‘universal’ online music retail model I’m on about (not stating here that iTunes should be this universal solution, but, well, commercial success and all…).

    Or am I just plain wrong about my suppositions/expectations of people? :rolleyes:

  • #19879


    yeah itunes and ipod work well. type album\artist into dialog, enter credit card details, click transfer and its downloaded and placed on your ipod. fairly intuitive.

    i personally dont have an ipod, alot of my buddies do. ive got and iriver ihp120. i prefer it because it plays formats like ogg etc, which conserves the space while keeping the quality.
    also there alot more firmware flashes to add new functionality.
    a techno heads dream!

  • #19883

  • #19886


    20 quid price has a large amount of padding, after all the things you mentioned such as duplication etc.

    if cdwow can drop or even tescos, hmv\virgin should fall in line or their going to fall behind?

    out of interest was the last cd anyone bought online(cdwow\itunes) etc. or did they go to the shop?

  • #19889


    Clearly, there is a customer ‘want’ for an easy-to-use and universal digital delivery method in pretty much all of the world (think of it as a worldwide web-based jukebox, i.e. the “eBay of music” with Buy-It-Now option only thoruhg Paypal or the like)… [/quote:df4b649ad6]
    Check out http://www.allofmp3.com…thats the right idea imo and its what i use anyway! :D

  • #19893


    good site alright, can select your bit rate etc.

    although i did read they are being sued because they published beatles tracks which apparently no online music store has rights too, not even itunes.

  • #19940


    There is an interesting US report out showing that co-workers sharing digital music in the workplace form impressions based on others’ musical libraries. What’s interesting is not just that this happens, but there’s an awareness of this process. People are consciously shaping what they share in an effort to build a favourable portrait of themselves, even with coworkers they don’t know and don’t interact with that much.

    Regarding the IRMA approach, most ISP terms and conditions provide a discretion to the ISP regarding disclosure and a positive obligation on the customer of the ISP not to breach the law when using the service, so it is likely that the ISPs will have a certain amount of discretion as to whether to acede to IRMA’s request. You have to wonder whether it would be a wise marketing move on the ISP, however to “shop” their customers!

  • #19942


    Don’t think it will make much of a difference, considering how few alternative BB ISPs there are in IE… Two stances, really: either they want to increase custom and don’t shop customers (letting the other ISPs do the shopping and getting bad word-of-mouth), or they think there’s gold to be had in thar musical hills with cosying up to the IRMA, and they sing.

  • #19977


    You can select ANY format at ANY bit rate. Thats why its so fantastic. It has MP3, WMA, OGG, FLAC, Monkey Audio and of course the icing on the cake for some people- MPEG4 AAC which is iTunes compatible.
    Payment is based on file size so the better the quailty, the more it will cost. I always get my music in MP3 format at 192kbps so the average song costs, oh around 5c! :D

    Another neat little app is the Explorer which you download to your computer. This app downloads the contents of the site so you dont even have to go online to check if they have the song your looking for, its also updated automatically when they add more songs. It also acts as a download managed so you can buy several songs or albums and they will be downloaded one after another, simultaneously or whatever way you prefer. All in all very nice!

  • #19978


    Sounds very good indeed – and presumably with the blessing of the IRMA and music labels.

    So, am I just showing my age when I ask: why haven’t I heard of it before?

    Or merely stating the obvious: piracy and P2P stories sell copies and garner public interest (a goodly portion of the BB-enabled portion of which partakes in file-sharing :D ), recommending/reviewing/making some noise about such a site interests noone (their own marketing efforst notwithstanding)?

    In essence: fair enough, the IRMA drumrolls about P2P etc. but why don’t they also use the opportunity to slip something “into the mainstream” about these new digital delivery options at the same time, demonstrating that -to those uneducated- there are legitmate options?

  • #19979


    I thought I heard of something recently with allofmp3.com whereas they were being taken to court over it or something?

    I’m sure I heard something along those lines…..could be mistaken though…..

  • #19985


    yeah there ben taken to court over beatles tracks.

  • #19988


    So does that mean they were taken to court by Michael Jackson, seeing as he owns the rights to The Beatles stuff(I think)..

    …..Wacko Jacko taking someone to court…..hmmm……

  • #19989


    i dont know who was doing the sueing but twas happening alright. i thought it was some russian group who was sueing them, seeing as there subject to russian law

  • #20098


    Ah yes, the legality of the whole thing! :D

    Well according to the site…

    Under the license terms, MediaServices pays license fees for all the materials subject to the Law of the Russian Federation “On Copyright and Related Rights”. [/quote:60e2fef05c]

    Basically from what I’ve read Allofmp3 is completely legal to use in Russia however they claim that its use may not be legal outside of Russia…

    Users are responsible for any usage and distribution of all materials received from AllOFMP3.com. This responsibility depends on the local legislation of each user’s country of residence. AllOFMP3.com’s Administration does not keep up with the laws of different countries and is not responsible the actions of non-Russian users.

    Hence I guess IRMA could come after people here for using it but in reality we’re just using an iTunes-esque service to get music. The attraction of Allofmp3 is that its WAY cheaper and has far more format options.

    The court cases so far have revolved around the availability of Beatles tracks that arent meant to be available online anywhere and also the fact that the Russian RIAA have accused MediaServices (the company who run the site) of having fake/illegal/worthless licensing deals with the record labels over there.

    Click here for the article relating to the first case and click here for the article on how they got off! :D

  • #20099


    Quoting myself :rolleyes:

    Sounds very good indeed – and presumably with the blessing of the IRMA and music labels.

    So, am I just showing my age when I ask: why haven’t I heard of it before?

    Presumption proven false, therefore.

    Info from the linkies is therefore why I’ve not heard of it before – it would appear that it’s no more legal than dowloading mp3s with any P2P app’ – which would also explain how they can charge so little (pure profits, no outlay aside from web/network!)

    note that I’m not (yet) calling users of allofmp3s muppets :D

  • #20100


    Ah but at least its users have some form of defense. Clearly we’re paying for the use of a service that has been in operation for some time and one would assume is therefore legal…

    Ignorance is bliss as they say! :p

  • #20102


    Ignorance is bliss as they say! :p [/quote:2c62b23e7f]

    true true, lets me sleep at night:)

  • #20103

  • #20139


    Hrm, while I wish there was a difference I guess in the eyes of the law there isnt. In the examples you gave one would obviously know they were illegal wheresas with allofmp3 I assumed it was legal up until April 18th at 02:09 PM! :D
    My conscience is therefore clear, my criminal record on the other hand….:p

  • #20491

  • #22803


    An interesting, but not altogether surprising development.

    Eircom and BT won’t oppose music firms
    Tuesday, July 05 2005
    by Matthew Clark – ENN

    Ireland’s internet service providers will not oppose attempts by the music industry to uncover the identities of individuals accused of illegal file-sharing.

    In Dublin on Monday, the High Court was told that Eircom and BT Ireland would not fight proceedings by the four record companies — EMI, Sony BMG, Universal Music and Warner Music — that are seeking files from the ISPs. The files in question would allow the music companies to identify people who are thought to have uploaded hundreds, possibly thousands, of songs to internet-based file-sharing services.

    John Gordon SC for BT Communications Ireland said that he wanted to make submissions as to how the court should exercise its discretion regarding the form of order in the case, Tuesday’s Irish Times reported, noting that Eircom has taken a similar view on the matter. It is believed that the submissions will relate to how the rights of the music companies should be balanced against those of consumers.

    Once the names and other details of accused file-swappers are out in the open, the four companies leading the assault against illegal music uploads will be able to press for further action in the High Court, or possible settlements that may cost the file-sharers thousands of euro. For now, Justice Peter Kelly has listed for hearing on Friday the proceedings by EMI, Sony BMG, Universal Music and Warner Music.

    The proceedings in Dublin stand in stark contrast to similar legal action in the US in recent years, with ISPs there fighting tooth and nail to resist the music industry, which was seeking information on file-swappers. Eventually, the big ISPs in the US lost the fight, paving the way for thousands of lawsuits against individuals in the US.

    Meanwhile, in April of this year, the Irish Recorded Music Association said 17 so-called “serial file-sharers” would be targeted with legal action, with Monday’s proceedings in the High Court moving the record companies a step closer to their goal.

    The action in Ireland is part of a global assault led by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), which filed 963 new cases against file-sharers in Britain, Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Iceland, Finland, Ireland and Japan in April. Worldwide, the total number of cases against those accused of illegal file-sharing has hit 11,552 worldwide since the US-based Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) began its crusade three years ago.

  • #22804


    A small update…

    Knowing the courts in this country however, I won’t be holding my breath![/quote:889ea407c5]

    As an aside to the topic, au contraire mon ami, injunctions are sought and granted in fairly short time-frames.

    Also our experience of the new commercial court has been very positive in getting cases in and heard very quickly, and they will accept IP cases.

    This has another positive effect of stopping what was a prevalent practice of issuing proceedings (ie starting litigation) where it was unlikely to be successful in the often-sucessful-anticipation that people will pay for you to go away to avoid years of painful court process to prove that they were right to begin with. Now you can be called into court very quickly if you issue proceedings and will be punished quickly and harshly if you should clearly not have done so. Judge Kelly (mentioned in the article and who is head of commercial court) is known for being fairly tough in that regard.

  • #22810


    In most countries, including Britain and the US, the courts have sided with the music industry and forced ISPs to produce names. But the Canadian courts last year ruled to protect the confidentiality of account holders, signalling that nothing is assured in the complicated world of global copyright law. [/quote:aaac9be1e3]
    Deek, the point I was making was that our courts were more than likely to go with the British and US courts and side with the music industry.

    Thats a pretty bad development there…At least IRMA are only going after the serious filesharers and to be honest looking at the figures for what some of those guys download I dont really have THAT much sympathy for them. As I’ve already mentioned my stance on filesharing is strictly try before you buy, the important word there being buy.

  • #22815


    Deek, the point I was making was that our courts were more than likely to go with the British and US courts and side with the music industry.

    Ah I misunderstood you – apologies. In fairness, our courts do not slavishly side with or follow other courts, but in terms of public policy the courts would go through the same processes of balancing legitmate business interests operating within the law against the privacy interest of individuals unknow that are not operating within the law.

  • #22816


    Indeed. I disagree with the way the Recording Industry is going about obtaining the user information however. This is where the whole legal area gets a little murky for me as I havnt read through all the end-user agreements, but arent the ISPs breaking a contract between themselves and their customers by releasing this kind of private information? So basically one “law” is being broken due to another law being broken? Two wrongs don’t make a right?

    Then again there may of course be a clause that stipulates that the contract is only valid as long as the user doesnt break any laws..

    Like I said, I’m abit in the dark on this issue…Steph? :)

  • #22817


The forum ‘Business and Legal’ is closed to new topics and replies.