0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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.
The High Court in Dublin has ruled that the identity of 17 suspected music swappers must be handed over. The IRMA has stated that they will contacting the individuals and offering them settlement deals, the details of the settlement offers have not yet been made public. The Director General of the IRMA had this to say about the High Courts ruling, “We will now be writing to the 17 individuals informing them of the seriousness of their actions. We will offer them the opportunity of settling the action. If they refuse our settlement terms, we will be forced to pursue the matter through the Courts. This is a last resort for the music industry. We hope that this decision will jolt others, particularly parents of teenagers, to realize that unauthorized file sharing is illegal and has consequences".
In an open letter to the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA), online civil rights organisation Digital Rights Ireland (DRI) has said plans to take 50 individuals to court for allegedly making copyrighted music available to download may not stand up in court because of the ‘automated’ manner in which it scanned individuals’ shared folders and its ability to prove lost earnings for the record companies concerned. On Tuesday it emerged that IRMA was planning to take legal action against illegal music file shares. If prosecuted under the Copyright Act, 2000 illegal music file sharers could face a fine of up to €1,900 for each song uploaded.In April IRMA took cases against 17 individuals and companies. Twelve of these settled out of court at an average of €2,500 each. IRMA is still suing a further three and is considering its legal options in the two remaining cases.Yesterday, however, DRI issued an open letter to IRMA raising issues outstanding since the actions last April.The first of these issues relates to the manner in which the individuals’ shared folders on their hard drives were entered and scanned. This was done on IRMA’s behalf by a US-based company called MediaSentry. DRI revealed that in at least two cases in Europe — in the Netherlands and France — the use of MediaSentry resulted in the cases being thrown out of court because the use of the technology was not in accordance with the provisions of the European data protection regulation.In its letter, DRI stated: “Data protection legislation provides that where personal information is processed in countries without adequate protection, those processing the information must take part in a ‘safe-harbour’ scheme. MediaSentry apparently does not operate within the safe-harbour scheme for data protection, although obliged to do so. As such, it has not agreed to handle EU citizens’ data in accordance with the European data protection regulations.
Northern Ireland has become the first region in Europe to have 100% access to high speed internet, according to the government. The announcement was made by Enterprise Minister Angela Smith on a visit to the MJM Group, a specialist joinery company in Rathfriland, County Down.
The High Court yesterday made an order requiring ISPs to hand over details of 49 alleged filesharers to the music industry. After the first such order, in July 2005, we expressed concern about the procedure which had been adopted. When we learnt about this second application, we wrote to the parties asking them to bring these concerns to the attention of the court. Unfortunately, not all of these points were put before the court and the judgment of Mr. Justice Kelly doesn’t address these issues.A particular problem is that the decision was made without the users being notified of the action or given a chance to make submissions to the court, despite an English authority recommending that this should be done, and contrary to the practice in the US where this must be done before the user is identified.This sets a worrying precedent. There are many reasons why a person may wish to remain anonymous online - for example, a whistleblower who seeks to expose corruption or safety issues may be intimidated by fear of retaliation.Irish Broadband couldn’t monitor usage. They had been caught up innocently in the matter. His clients did not want a perception that they had lost a court case to be given out if the court ordered that they should hand over their subscribers details. He stated that they were precluded from handing this information voluntarily as, per previous judgements, they have duty under Data Protection legislation to their subscribers. Giving his judgement in favour of the Plaintiffs’ application, Mr. Justice Peter Kelly stated that the kind of actions at issue in this case were “A modern form of thieving.” He also clarified that the undertakings by the Plaintiffs to ensure that the information gleaned from the order is only to be used for the purposes it is given for specifically left it open to the Plaintiffs to allow the information to be passed on to the criminal prosecution authorities, and that “perhaps you ought”.
Digital Rights Ireland has written to the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Michael McDowell TD, and to the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Noel Dempsey TD and to the Garda Commissioner. We have looked for undertakings from them to cease breaching the Constitutional, statutory and European rights of the citizens of Ireland. Failing a positive response, we have instructed our solicitors, McGarr Solicitors, to prepare legal action
