[ILUG] Eircom surrenders

[Braun Brelin]

I happen to have subscribed to the unlimited download cap, so does this mean
I'm exempt from Eircom's policy of cutting off
heavy users?

:-~)

Braun


On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Michael Watterson <watty at eircom.net> wrote:

> paul at clubi.ie wrote:
>
>>
>> IPs published by trackers are hearsay. Some trackers even *deliberately*
>> publish additional, randomish IPs along with actual participating IPs (TBP
>> does so). So the reporter really needs to download the actual file from the
>> actual IPs before making any such reports. It's also important the reporter
>> is careful about the accuracy of the time.
>> cuttr
>> Reporting IPs based on mere P2P participant-lists is guaranteed to lead to
>> the following headlines (and already has in the UK):
>>
>>  "<middle-aged or elderly> <person or couple> <sued|disconnected> for
>>  downloading latest <gangster rapper album|first-person shooter
>>  game>!"
>>
>> which will surely further sink the reputation of those responsible for
>> anti-P2P actions.
>>
>> regards,
>>
> They have custom clients that actually peer. So it's not just a tracker
> list but a real upload and download. This can all be automated and use a
> wide range of dynamic IPs of different providers to make "guardian" lists
> useless.
>
> I suspect some 3rd party companies (the rights holders contract all this
> out to 3rd parties) may  even set up honey pot servers with watermarked
> content, it may not just be P2P. Or even hack servers or install malware on
> users PCs. Which may be illegal.
>
> In the past some fairly stupid things have been done and if there is a time
> zone error, then of course the IP may be something stupid.
>
> Does anyone really believe that eircom will warn & cut off with out looking
> at traffic usage logs?
>
> Aren't the heavy downloaders the most likely to be reported and is eircom
> likely to cut off non-heavy downloads. The right's holders and their IP
> collection agencies never know who the IP belongs to.
>
> They can't correlate the number eircom says are disconnected nor any
> traffic reduction eircom claims to actual users or numbers of users. eircom
> wants this to succeed as it is cheap and simple and really makes it someone
> else's problem. If they make sure to cut off very high traffic users
> reported the headline traffic reduction can be 50% to 80%. The rights
> holders will be happy.
>
> Does anyone believe that very high traffic (200Gbyte + per month is not
> even full bandwidth) users that get reported more than 3 times (could be
> different IPs) are NOT breaking copyright on a 24x7 x365 annual basis? These
> people are also being subsidized by 80% to 90% of normal customers as they
> pay the same amount per month.
>
> There is an issue of lack of transparency and right of appeal. But eircom
> has always had the right to disconnect high traffic users under FUP/T&C.
>
> --
> Mike
>
>
> --
> Irish Linux Users' Group mailing list
> About this list : http://mail.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug
> Who we are : http://www.linux.ie/
> Where we are : http://www.linux.ie/map/
>