ISPs providing addresses of p2p users to the IRMA? (1 Viewer)

[pete]

Nobody else settled.

 

[SONYMEGADRIVE]

I can't wait to get the letter from Eircom stating that the track I downloaded "Sword Heaven - Skinned and Glued" is a copyright track controlled by IRMA and my internet is being cut off.

seriously though, how do you tell what IRMA cover? is this a catch all thing? are the 'ready to die'
demos gonna get me in trouble? is 'ready to die' gonna get me in trouble? this only effects eircom
people at the moment, right?

 

[Gambra]

So everyone's just going to ditch Eircom.

 

[Lili Marlene]

yup

or is there some thing along the lines of them owning all the connections and the rest just rent off them?

 

[Gambra]

seriously though, how do you tell what IRMA cover? is this a catch all thing? are the 'ready to die'
demos gonna get me in trouble? is 'ready to die' gonna get me in trouble? this only effects eircom
people at the moment, right?

It's one of the main problems I can see with it. Will they send letters that just say you have been caught and that's it or will they actually specify the track? Will it kick in anytime you download any mp3 from mediafire or rapidshare or what. And yes, Ready To Die would get you in trouble.

 

[rettucs]

yup

or is there some thing along the lines of them owning all the connections and the rest just rent off them?

they own the infrastructure as far as the local loop. From there to your house its your provider, so theoretically they can know what you're doing, but there has to be some privacy infringement if they're monitoring usage of people who aren't their customers.

Alternatively, go with NTL. They piggyback their bb signal through the tv cable. No eircom involvement whatsoever.

 

[rettucs]

It's one of the main problems I can see with it. Will they send letters that just say you have been caught and that's it or will they actually specify the track? Will it kick in anytime you download any mp3 from mediafire or rapidshare or what. And yes, Ready To Die would get you in trouble.

someone should download their own track. For the crack. Getting one of those letters would be hilarious in those circumstances.

 

[Lili Marlene]

They piggyback their bb signal through the tv cable.

witchcraft!

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

can the law be applied differently to me so that fans can download my music without fear of the law? i will make a fortune from touring then

 

[MilanPan!c]

there's always the seedbox solution... course it'll cost you...

 

[Lili Marlene]

Do people think that if this was enforced heavily then the likes of hard-disk sharing could become more commonplace or is would it just be seen as a step backwards?

 

[Gambra]

there's always the seedbox solution... course it'll cost you...

Why would anyone do that for a few tunes?

 

[billygannon]

This is total nonsense.
Whenever there are changes to a technology the law has to catch up to try and legislate for it.
For instance, as cars engines grew in size, the speed limit was introduced and subsequently amended.

In the past this has worked fine. The reason being is that changes to technologies took a relatively long time to develop. There were physical realities to deal with. It took time for new models to be built in factories.

The problem with recorded music is that whereas it used to be contained in a physical object (vinyl, cassette, CD) it can now be held in a purely digital form. Essentially music can be reduced to a series of 1's and 0's.
All that Mp3s and other digital formats are is a way of rebuilding these 1's and 0's.

Because the way in which music can now be held (in a digital format) it means changes to this technology can advance at an extraordinarily quick pace. New formats and new ways to avoid legal restrictions can be developed in less than a year.

So if the legislator wants to put a legal framework around music held in a digital format, it has to continually adapt.

My argument is that the law can't adapt quickly enough. It cannot conduct a proper review of the impact of each new law passed because the technology its trying to legislate for changes too quickly.

Therefore recorded music held in a digital format should no longer be considered a commodity that can be bought and sold and a new way of compensating musicians needs to be developed.

 

[MilanPan!c]

You're the one that said "few," not me.

 

[Lili Marlene]

This is total nonsense.
Whenever there are changes to a technology the law has to catch up to try and legislate for it.
For instance, as cars engines grew in size, the speed limit was introduced and subsequently amended.

In the past this has worked fine. The reason being is that changes to technologies took a relatively long time to develop. There were physical realities to deal with. It took time for new models to be built in factories.

The problem with recorded music is that whereas it used to be contained in a physical object (vinyl, cassette, CD) it can now be held in a purely digital form. Essentially music can be reduced to a series of 1's and 0's.
All that Mp3s and other digital formats are is a way of rebuilding these 1's and 0's.

Because the way in which music can now be held (in a digital format) it means changes to this technology can advance at an extraordinarily quick pace. New formats and new ways to avoid legal restrictions can be developed in less than a year.

So if the legislator wants to put a legal framework around music held in a digital format, it has to continually adapt.

My argument is that the law can't adapt quickly enough. It cannot conduct a proper review of the impact of each new law passed because the technology its trying to legislate for changes too quickly.

Therefore recorded music held in a digital format should no longer be considered a commodity that can be bought and sold and a new way of compensating musicians needs to be developed.

gonna quote this one last time then i'll stop, I promise

Perhaps the closest model for the future of recorded music is the sad, funding-dependent, workshop-running, pleading and dwindling subculture that still writes poetry while dreaming of the infamy of Byron.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

gonna quote this one last time then i'll stop, I promise


[/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]

Music will always have a audience - so I don't see the analogy to poetry.

 

[Lili Marlene]

the amount of people who write and release poetry vs. read it I would say would be fairly close to the amount who write and release music vs. listen to it*. Plus poetry doesn't have these kind of distribution problems working against it

but I took it from this which I think is probably more true than i'd strictly like it to be



* (actively listen to it. millions of people hear music every day in the same way millions of people know the Daffodils and Mid Term Break)

 

[billygannon]

gonna quote this one last time then i'll stop, I promise


[/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]

Basically that's the reality.
This law will ultimately punish only a few people. New ways of circumnavigating it will develop soon and the government and record companies will be back to having to try and stop people illegally downloading music.

The recorded music industry as we know it will collapse because of the internet. It's the big loser.

It's different to print or film. There is a real desire for people to actually hold a book when reading it or watch a film in a cinema.
The vast majority of people who listen to music don't care what format it comes in. If anything they prefer to be able to hold their entire record collection in one iPod that have numerous CDs or cassettes.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

I'll read the rest of it tonight but this from the first paragraph doesn't give me hope that it will be any good....

I think the idea would have been to make the case that by diversifying into such avenues, it remains possible for cultish, little-known indie musicians to make money – despite the scourge of internet piracy.

He is assuming cultish, little known indie musicians are not making money because of piracy, that's not true.They are not making music because they are cultish little known indie musicians. The idea that they would be swimming in it if there was no piracy is silly. In fact the digital era allows them to find an audience in a way that was never possible before.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

This might open some debate!

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/how-much-do-music-artists-earn-online/