Legislation has compelled many ISPs to participate in such programs. In 2009, South Korean ISPs became the first in the world to implement a so-called graduated response scheme and 2011′s Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Act brought the mechanism to New Zealand. The HADOPI legislation introduced a similar program to the French.

However, not all participation has been forced by law. The United States’ “six-strikes” program was introduced voluntarily last year but by that time the Irish had already gained several years’ experience of a self-imposed regime.

In 2009, Eircom, the country’s largest ISP, prepared its own three-strikes program following a deal with the major recording labels, a package which allowed Eircom to disconnect persistent infringers. So now, four years since its introduction in 2010, how many people has Eircom disconnected? A hundred? One thousand? Five?

According to the ISP – not even one.

“We are continuing to implement the graduated response process,” a spokesman said today. “We haven’t, as yet, disconnected anyone.”

Eircom’s system allows the user two notices of infringement before a third notice triggers a seven-day disconnection. A further notice means disconnection for a year. Considering the cries of rampant piracy from the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA), the notion that not a single subscriber from Eircom’s 700,000 customer pool has been caught file-sharing more than twice is certainly going to raise eyebrows.

Several years ago the ISP said it was sending out at least 1,000 notices per week, but now the company apparently doesn’t want anyone to know how many are going out.

“We don’t share details on the number of letters issued,” a spokesman said.

Independent.ie cites a source close to Eircom who states that many of those who received letters are “believed to have desisted from suspected filesharing” but with no figures being released on the number of warnings being sent, it’s impossible to draw any conclusions. Of course, it’s also just as easily said that those who were caught originally simply went underground with their downloading habits.

For their part, IRMA clearly thinks that the Eircom program is working. The music group is currently taking legal action to force ISP UPC to Eircom in promising to disconnect pirating customers.

If UPC loses and then follows Eircom’s example, that will presumably amount to zero subscribers by 2018.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Fearing that innocent subscribers were affected by the plan, the Irish Data Protection Commissioner got involved, claiming the privacy of Internet subscribers was at stake.

The immediate outcome was bad for the labels as the commissioner ordered “3 strikes” to be brought to a halt on privacy grounds.

However, a few months later the four major record labels challenged this decision with success.

For a final decision the case went to the Supreme Court which decided to dismiss the appeal this week.

The court held that the commissioner could not specify why any provisions of the Data Protection Acts were contravened by the three-strikes scheme.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

At the moment customers of the Irish ISP Eircom cannot access The Pirate Bay since an uncontested 2009 High Court ruling orders the ISP to block the site. But that’s just one ISP, some people will say, and it’s easy to switch to another. Nice try.

The major recording labels, all members of the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA), now want that blockade to be extended to other service providers. The progressive wedge the activists warned about is getting thicker already.

To that end IRMA approached other ISPs including UPC, Imagine, Vodafone, Digiweb and Hutchison 3G to agree to a Pirate Bay blockade. As detailed in our earlier report, they all refused and IRMA turned to the courts.

Last month the ISPs confirmed that proceedings had been served on their legal representatives by the big four record labels – EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner Music – and December 17 2012 the case went before the High Court.

The case was adjourned until January 29 but in meantime the parties are required to meet before January 12 and further correspond by January 14 to hammer out some details. It is quite possible that the court will ultimately decide that the Pirate Bay blockade should be extended to these other providers.

“So what, there are other sites to use,” some people will say. Nice try.

What has transpired is that while the case appears focused on removing access to The Pirate Bay, even bigger things are being planned.

The plaintiffs (technically EMI, Ireland) have told the court that they are looking to achieve more than just a blockade of the world’s biggest torrent site. In fact, they have a list of 260 other “objectionable” websites they have identified that they would also like blocked if this attack on The Pirate Bay is a success.

What started out with Eircom agreeing to have The Pirate Bay blocked could now potentially lead to a few other Irish ISPs having to follow suit. In a worst case scenario that could play out to all ISPs having to block 260 other sites on the music industry’s hit-list. Which sites? Only they know.

So, next time you hear the argument that someone “just” wants to block The Pirate Bay, it will be easier to understand why even people who don’t support the site are against it. One thing definitely leads to another in this game, and who knows where we’ll end up.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The so-called “graduated response” process would complete after a customer had received three warnings – at this point their Internet would be cut off. But by October 2010 things we starting to go wrong. Due to a mix up, Eircom sent out around 300 warning letters to completely innocent subscribers.

The error meant that Ireland’s Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) got involved in the process. The immediate outcome was bad for the labels. In December the DPC ordered “3 strikes” to be brought to a halt on privacy grounds.

This decision was later challenged by the ‘Big Four’ labels of IRMA – EMI Records, Sony Music, Universal and Warner – who said that the DPC ruling effectively disabled their ‘lawful’ agreement with Eircom.

Yesterday, the labels’ appeals bore fruit. At the Commercial Court, Mr Justice Peter Charleton ordered the Data Protection Commissioner’s decision to be quashed, a ruling which gives IRMA and Eircom the green light to continue with warnings and disconnections.

Justice Charleton said that the DPC notice was invalid due to the Commissioner failing to provide any detailed reasons why it had been issued. The Judge went on to question whether it had any basis in law.

Although privacy issues were the key motivator behind the DPC’s ruling, Justice Charleton said it was not clear how privacy might have been compromised by the detection and punishment of individuals who engage in unlawful Internet file-sharing.

The Irish Recorded Music Association said last night that it would now “press ahead” with its three strike regime. Expect other ISPs to come under pressure soon.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The so-called Big Four labels – EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner – wanted the ISP to install proactive filtering technology aimed at stopping unauthorized file-sharing among Eircom’s customers. Eircom refused, IRMA sued, and the case ended up in court – but not for very long.

At the 11th hour in February 2009 the companies came to an agreement which would see Eircom introduce a graduated response system for dealing with errant subscribers.

However, Eircom needed something in return. The agreement had left Eircom in the unenviable position of being the only ISP in Ireland with an official policy of disconnecting customers on the mere allegations of the music industry.

But the first recording industry target, ISP UPC, refused to play ball and after being sued it eventually won its case.

While the labels did ‘reward’ Eircom’s compliance with the MusicHub service, the product has been labeled lacklaster and when PaidContent asked how many users the service had, Eircom refused to tell them.

So with Eircom now at a commercial disadvantage and no immediate sign that the industry will force any other ISP to implement 3 strikes, the ISP is being left to go it alone. In making the best out of a bad situation it’s now describing what it is doing as an “obligation”.

“Eircom is of the view that these obligations are part of a role that all responsible companies must serve,” Eircom’s consumer managing director Stephen Beynon said.

Eircom insist that they want to respect their customers’ right to privacy but from fighting IRMA in 2008/9, they now believe that other ISPs should do as they have done, and do a deal with the recording group.

“We think that it would be better for everyone if the industry and the rights-holders found a way to tackle this problem. It’s not going to go away. The current situation is not ideal but we could create something that moved the issue forward if we worked together,” Beynon added.

Or in other words, the water’s great, come on in.

Beynon says that Eircom believes it has an obligation to uphold the law when illegal activity is brought to its attention but it’s taking the word of a private P2P tracking company as final and there is no judicial oversight, something that causes controversy in every jurisdiction it’s suggested.

It’s interesting to note that if Eircom had held its ground back in 2008 when it was sued by the labels to proactively filter subscriber upload data, by now it would have heard Europe’s highest court dismiss what they were being asked to do as illegal.

Had they known that in 2009, would they have felt so compelled to do the 3 strikes deal?

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

But the agreement actually went further. Eircom also agreed that if the labels went to the High Court and asked for an injunction against The Pirate Bay, Eircom would not contest it. The deal worked as planned.

In his July 24th High Court ruling Mr Justice Peter Charleton wrote that The Pirate Bay was “dedicated, on a weird ideological basis” to “stealing” copyrighted material and handed down an injunction ordering Eircom to block the site.

Perhaps understandably Charleton’s ruling wasn’t particularly popular with some customers of Eircom, but according to comments from the judge quoted by Irish Times, disapproval also came from further afield.

The day after the ruling Charleton was informed that the Garda, Ireland’s national police force, wanted to speak with him. Apparently his ruling hadn’t been well received and people were threatening retribution.

“I was regarded as a traitor, would you mind, to freedom of expression on the internet,” said Charleton when speaking at a lecture at Fordham University in the US.

“Threats were made that my life would be ‘wrecked by computer’. The people in question, the cyber-terrorists, were proposing to hack into my computer to get my credit card and other details, order any number of pizzas for my greedy gut and get call girls to turn up to my door and plant child pornography on my work computers.”

Now, while there is no particular reason to doubt the words of Justice Charleton who, incidentally, has made at least one important ruling since 2009 that actually favored file-sharers, the story does take a turn for the unusual.

Delivering mountains of pizza and providing hookers to unsuspecting individuals has all the hallmarks of a 4chan/Anonymous campaign but apparently the threats to Justice Charleton had come from unlikely lands including Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

Nevertheless, the threats were taken seriously. Justice Charleton confided in a colleague over the child-porn planting threats and he agreed to provide the judge with an alibi. Technical measures were taken too.

“One precaution was to put up firewalls,” noted Charleton. “These work so well that my computer is so slow that I have stopped using it. So, they did get their revenge.”

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The case went to the High Court but although Mr Justice Peter Charleton acknowledged that recording companies were being harmed by Internet piracy, he said that laws to cut off file-sharers were not enforceable in Ireland.

“It is not surprising that the legislative response laid down in our country in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, at a time when this problem was not perceived to be as threatening to the creative and retail economy as it has become in 2010, has made no proper provision for the blocking, diverting or interrupting of internet communications intent on breaching copyright,” he said in his judgment.

By not having this legislative mechanism in place, Justice Charleton said that Ireland is not in compliance with its obligations under European law. The only thing the courts can force an Internet host to carry out, he said, is the removal of infringing material.

Now, through its ‘Consultation on Amendment to Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000′, the Irish government is taking steps to change legislation to close this apparent loophole.

“It must be emphasised that this proposed amendment is not about the introduction of a statutory regulatory regime in relation to copyright infringement such as the French ‘Hadopi’ system or the ‘Three strikes’ regime set out in the Digital Economy Act in the United Kingdom,” notes the proposal.

Nevertheless, while they do not implement a statutory regime, adoption of the proposals could yield a similar result, a situation welcomed by IRMA.

“We have always been looking for the right to take injunctions against ISPs if they are not dealing with illegality on their networks,” said IRMA chief executive Dick Doyle.

The proposals published yesterday are open for public consultation with a closing date of July 1st, just over a week away. Submissions should be sent to IPU@djei.ie or posted to the Intellectual Property Unit, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Kildare Street, Dublin 2.

The proposals come on the back of the news that due to an administrative computer error, in October last year Eircom wrongly sent out around 300 “first strike” warning letters to innocent subscribers. The error is now being investigated by the Irish Data Protection Commissioner.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

“Eircom is proceeding with implementation of the protocol which could result in the suspension and ultimately disconnection of broadband service for those customers who deliberately and persistently infringe copyright,” the company said in a December 2010 statement, reiterating their commitment to the scheme.

But little did we know that the fears of “3 strikes” opponents had already come true.

From deep inside the “how the hell did the majority of the media miss this department”, it now becomes clear that by October 2010, Eircom had already sent out around 300 warning letters to completely innocent subscribers.

The company seems to have tried to play down the error saying that computer clocks were incorrectly adjusted to compensate for daylight saving time, some comfort to the unlucky letter recipients.

According to TJ McIntyre at digital rights site EDRI.org, as a result of this failure the Irish Data Protection Commissioner is now investigating the entire Eircom scheme.

“The significance of this case goes well beyond simple technical failings however, as the complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) has triggered a wider investigation of the legality of the entire three strikes system,” he writes.

The DPC is said to be not only investigating the complaint but also “whether the subject matter gives rise to any questions as to the proportionality of the graduated response system operated by Eircom and the music industry.”

McIntyre says that when the Eircom/IRMA deal was being agreed, the DPC expressed concerns with it, not least over the question of whether or not IP addresses are personal data. However, until someone raised a complaint, that issue was put on the back burner. The delivery of 300 false “first strike” warning letters appears to have met that criteria.

“The complaint in this case has now triggered that action, and it seems likely that the Commissioner will reach a decision reflecting his previous views that using IP addresses to cut off customers’ internet connections is disproportionate and does not constitute ‘fair use’ of personal information,” McIntyre explains.

“If so, the Commissioner has the power and indeed the duty to issue an enforcement notice which would prevent Eircom from using personal data for this purpose – an outcome which would derail the three strikes system unless Eircom successfully challenges that notice before the courts, or unless the music industry were to succeed in its campaign to secure legislation introducing three strikes into Irish law.”

The way this story has flown largely under the mainstream tech news radar will have been a relief to Eircom and IRMA. Something tells us that is about to change.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

According to Eircom, MusicHub will provide subscriber access to unlimited streaming of all tracks in the above labels’ catalogs, with no restrictions and with no advertising.

If MusicHub users would like to download songs they can do that too. Monthly packages will start at 15 tracks for €5.99 up to 40 tracks for €12.99.

While the MusicHub deal is the product of cooperation between Eircom and the music industry, it is born out of conflict. In February 2009, IRMA – representing EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner – reached an 11th hour out of court settlement with Eircom on the controversial issue of illicit file-sharing.

The implementation of the agreement was held up over legal argument, but earlier this year the High Court in Dublin gave it the green light. The deal would see Eircom introduce a graduated response system for dealing with errant subscribers so now, along with today’s MusicHub carrot, comes the 3 strikes stick.

“Eircom is proceeding with implementation of the protocol which could result in the suspension and ultimately disconnection of broadband service for those customers who deliberately and persistently infringe copyright,” the company said today in a statement.

As expected, Eircom will send out warnings to subscribers suspected of illicit file-sharing in the first instance to “encourage them to change their behaviour”, then it intends to get tough.

“If a customer persists with the illegal activity it may result in a seven day suspension or yearlong disconnection of their broadband service,” the company warns.

A seven day suspension will be triggered when the music industry monitors a user sharing illicit files for the third time. Any further notice will activate the 12 month disconnection.

Eircom notes that the scheme has been operating on a trial basis since June this year and the number of notifications being processed have now reached 1,000 per month.

In stark contrast to its earlier neutral position (on which IRMA took the ISP to court), Eircom now says it has a responsibility to deal with the copyright infringements of its customers on behalf of the music industry.

“The company believes that it has a duty to ensure that the rights of artists and the laws of the state, including copyright law, are upheld, and to take action when illegal activity is brought to our attention,” it notes.

Nevertheless, Eircom adds that “our obligations to our customers remain paramount, and the primacy of their rights, in particular their rights to privacy, are reflected in the phased structure of the protocol, and in the Eircom MusicHub service launched today. Eircom is of the view that these obligations are part of a role that all responsible companies must serve.”

To this end, Eircom is guaranteeing that it will never hand subscribers’ personal details to the music industry and will never monitor their online activities. They will, however, take the word of the music industry and their monitors on face value and presume it is accurate as a matter of course.

Other ISPs in Ireland, such as UPC, have refused to play ball. In a recent court case it was decided that a 3 strikes regime could not be forced on an Internet service provider.

However, as detailed in our earlier report, the government is appealing for the music industry and ISPs to get together to try and reach some sort of compromise. According to its announcement today, Eircom will position itself as some kind of broker in the negotiations.

“Today Eircom confirmed that it will continue to play a leadership role with the music industry, other ISPs, and key stakeholders including Government to find a long term sustainable solution that addresses the issues of illegal file sharing while minimising the impact on customers.”

What remains to be seen now is how the ISP market pans out. Will customers stop pirating and switch to Eircom to gain access to the MusicHub service, or will they stay with the likes of UPC in order to carry on pirating without worry of disconnections? Will the disconnections at Eircom have the desired effect, or will customers simply switch to another ISP? The next few months should prove very interesting.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The deal would see the ISP introduce a 3 strikes system for dealing with subscribers who share songs to which the labels own the copyright. The implementation of the agreement was held up over legal argument, but in April this year the High Court in Dublin gave it the green light.

Part of the private agreement between IRMA and Eircom required that the ISP should not be put at a competitive disadvantage through this 3 strikes set up. That meant that IRMA would have to go after other ISPs to force them to do the same.

Among others, IRMA sought agreement from UPC, but the ISP refused to play ball and the case went to the Irish High Court. Today the result of that action was announced and for the record labels and Eircom, the result was bad news.

In a judgment published today, Mr Justice Peter Charleton acknowledged that recording companies were being harmed by Internet piracy but that laws to cut off file-sharers were not enforceable in Ireland.

“It is not surprising that the legislative response laid down in our country in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, at a time when this problem was not perceived to be as threatening to the creative and retail economy as it has become in 2010, has made no proper provision for the blocking, diverting or interrupting of internet communications intent on breaching copyright,” began the judgment.

Justice Charleton noted that by not having this legislative mechanism in place, Ireland is not in compliance with its obligations under European law. He added that the only thing the courts can force an Internet host to carry out is the removal of infringing material.

“UPC has repeatedly stressed that it does not condone piracy and has always taken a strong stance against illegal activity on its network,” the company said in a statement.

“It takes all steps required by the law to combat specific infringements which are brought to its attention and will continue to co-operate with rights holders where they have obtained the necessary court orders for alleged copyright infringements.”

“Our whole premise and defence focused on the mere conduit principle which provides that an internet service provider cannot be held liable for content transmitted across its network and today’s decision supports the principle that ISPs are not liable for the actions of internet subscribers.”

The ruling leaves the music industry high and dry in Ireland and Eircom in the unfortunate position of being left at a commercial disadvantage. It will be interesting to see how the record labels and ISP handle this development.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.