×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Music Industry Sues Irish Government For Piracy

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the going-for-the-gold dept.

Piracy 341

bs0d3 writes "The music industry has initiated a lawsuit against the Irish government for not having blocking laws on the books; on the theory that if blocking laws were in place then filesharing would go away. On Tuesday the music industry issued a plenary summons against the Irish government which is the first step towards making this litigation possible. This all began in October 2010 (EMI v. UPC), when an Irish judge ruled that Irish law did not permit an order to be made against an ISP requiring blocking of websites. Recently several ISPs across the European Union have been ordered by courts to block thepiratebay.org through legal maneuvers."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

341 comments

The Irish, being a compliant group... (5, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671032)

The Irish, being a compliant group, will no doubt capitulate without a fight.

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group... (4, Interesting)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671262)

They could counter-sue the music industry for running an illegal cartel.

But more likely, based on how things in Ireland work when it comes to votes on the European Union, they could be thrown a token few million here and there, and a law will be passed. They are an easy nation to bribe.

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group of niggers.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671388)

Niggers. That's what you will say if you ever date a redhead. And I mean the curtains did match the drapes if ya know what I mean...

But it just isn't worth it. Niggers niggers niggers! That's what you'll be saying if you date a redhead.

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group of niggers.. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671538)

Curtains and drapes are the same thing, dumbass. That's like saying "the curtains matched the curtains".

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group of niggers.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671658)

I'd advise you to look beyond the borders of your own nation, while you still can. In the civilized world, a drape is a cloth that covers furniture, not a window.

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group of niggers.. (1, Informative)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671782)

You got it wrong anyway, the expression is "the carpet matched the curtains" or a close variant of that. You can argue about the definition of drapes, but the established home decor metaphor for pubic hair is certainly carpet. For example, lesbians are often referred to as 'carpet munchers.' Neither meaning of drapes makes for a good comparison.

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group... (4, Funny)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671382)

Waiting for a Wolfe Tones song about the valiant IRA fight against EMI.

It's funny because it will happen...

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group... (3, Funny)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671396)

For those who do not believe me...

Rock On Rockall [youtube.com] - this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall [wikipedia.org]
Hands up Trousers Down [youtube.com]
The Helicopter Song [youtube.com] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Mountjoy_Prison_helicopter_escape [wikipedia.org]
Fenian Record Player [youtube.com]

If anything, the music industry should probably be more afraid of Irish music than of the Irish government!

Re:The Irish, being a compliant group... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671754)

Nah i'd rather hope that all the people from ireland will unite against the music industry, causing bono (youtoo?) to put some pressure on the industry to stop harassing this beautifull country... power to the peephole!!

Who are the pirates? (2)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671394)

Come to think of it, who are behaving like pirates in this case?

The Irish Government or the MAFIAA & Co. ?

LOL (3, Interesting)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671034)

I wonder what is next? Maybe they will put the government in jail? Or as they represent the irish people, the whole nation should go to jail? ARE THESE GUYS CRAZY?

Re:LOL (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671060)

ARE THESE GUYS CRAZY?

They're filthy rich and entitled and want to be more of both.

Re:LOL (5, Funny)

flaming error (1041742) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671088)

> I wonder what is next?
After suing their customers, suing a sovereign country was the next logical business move. After Ireland, they will sue the United Nations, only to learn they have less money than Ireland. So then they'll sue Portugal and Greece. Then God.

Then they'll come back to Earth and sue their distribution chain, then their singers and songwriters, and finally, in a final act of desperate cannibalism, they'll finally sue the Master of all Piracy - Weird Al.

Re:LOL (2)

EdZ (755139) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671130)

Eventually, they'll have to start suing each other for having the temerity to even consider operating in the same market.

Re:LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671720)

sue the moon.

Re:LOL (3, Insightful)

wisty (1335733) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671108)

I'd like to know what else you can sue the government for. If they had the death penalty for petty theft, I bet you'd see a lot less theft. Can drug addicts sue the government for not imprisoning their dealers? Can convicted dealers sue because the government didn't imprison their clients? There's endless fun to be had!

Re:LOL (4, Interesting)

niftydude (1745144) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671178)

Well I know cigarette companies have been threatening to sue the Australian government because the government wants to force cigarettes to be sold in plain paper packaged boxes. It's actually been pretty interesting to follow.

I could probably make a witty comment about the similarities between music labels and cigarette corporations, but everyone knows that they are both scum, so I won't bother.

Re:LOL (1)

mywhitewolf (1923488) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671224)

we do this in our country (plain packaging for cigarettes). its a slippery slope, now you're not even allowed to show clients the range of cigarettes they want to purchase.. outright banning isn't too far off IMO.

3 Australia, the nanny state. (at least nanny told us not to waste all our money on a dodgy market, so although we have problems they aren't anything compared to Americas)

Re:LOL (1)

zoloto (586738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671256)

I find it funny you're against selling a poison which is deliberately sold to be ingested or inhaled for the general public to consume.

Re:LOL (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671486)

So you would support a ban on alcohol?
It's a poison sold for ingestion of the general public.

Re:LOL (5, Insightful)

Rennt (582550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671228)

I'm no friend of the tobacco lobby, but the two things are like chalk and cheese. The tobacco companies are suing because of legislation that limits freedoms. They feel they are being harmed unfairly. The music industry is suing because legislation that limits freedoms does not exist. They feel that everybody else are not being harmed unfairly enough!

Re:LOL (1)

bendy (34731) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671508)

No, I think the tobacco companies are worried about losing profits so are doing everything they can think of to try and prevent plain packaging. It wouldn't matter if they thought it was fair, they'd still react in the same way.

Re:LOL (2)

niftydude (1745144) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671532)

Well if the tobacco lobby hadn't treated their product with ammonia specifically for the purpose of making their products more addictive, then I'd feel they had a leg to stand on.

Secretly attempting to addict people to your product is one of the most insidious attacks on freedom that there is.

Re:LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671672)

So.... we should be suing the music mafia for limiting our freedoms!

And the stupid comes full circle.. Ahhh i love it.

Or we could just shoot them. I kinda like that idea too.

Re:LOL (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671226)

whatever they let you sue them for, and even if they don't, some other country will take up your cause for the proper consideration. Then it becomes a treaty negotiation.

Re:LOL (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671584)

Perhaps any convicted criminal could sue the government for having a law against whatever they did, too. After all, if there were no laws, there'd be no crime.

Re:LOL (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671114)

ARE THESE GUYS CRAZY?

If there was any doubt before now, it has been removed.

If they weren't completely batshit insane they would have sued a government with some money.

Re:LOL (1)

Muros (1167213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671696)

ARE THESE GUYS CRAZY?

If there was any doubt before now, it has been removed. If they weren't completely batshit insane they would have sued a government with some money.

There is nothing insane about this. These assholes aren't after a lump sum. They want a percentage of the tax take.

Get in line... (3, Insightful)

hawks5999 (588198) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671036)

The Irish government is so broke, what is the MAFIAA going get? Ireland is judgement proof.

Re:Get in line... (2, Funny)

flaming error (1041742) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671104)

>> what is the MAFIAA going get?
Why, the Irish people, of course.

Suing customers costs money. The Irish cost nothing.

Re:Get in line... (2)

Mysteray (713473) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671478)

>> what is the MAFIAA going get?
Why, the Irish people, of course.

Of course, this solution has been proposed before [gutenberg.org]:

I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust.

Re:Get in line... (3, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671356)

Judge: To the plaintiff, the RIAA, I award 10 billion dollars.
Ireland: Now see here laddie, we ain't got that type of money now.
Judge: Hmm... What DO you have?
Ireland: Well, we have good old Irish luck! And we have this four-leaf clover that's always brought us... well financial ruin when you get down to it.
Judge: I hear you have good whiskey...
Ireland: WE'LL KILL YE WHERE YE STAND BY GOD!!!
Judge: OKAY, calm down. What else?
Ireland: We have a few bands I suppose we could part with. The Cranberries! They're Irish! They can have the Cranberries. Remember "Zombie?"
Judge: I'm trying not to... zo-hom-bie,zo-hom-bie,... damnit! Well, not good enough. Who else?
Ireland: ...Sinéad O'Connor?
Judge: Oh come on!
Ireland: Who do ye suggest?
Judge: I think you know.
Ireland: Oh... God no... you couldn't be talking about
Judge: Yes. U2.
Ireland: (starts crying) No! Not Bono! You can take the Edge and... that other guy, but leave Bono!

Re:Get in line... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671654)

Sorry, U2 isn't an option - they've already moved their publishing business to the Netherlands, after the Irish government capped the tax exemption on artists at a mere €250,000.

Re:Get in line... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671798)

More like :
Judge : the RIAA is get 100 kazilion dollars
Ireland : No you don't, you're fired, and further more companies like the RIAA are hereby considered terrorists by law and should be expedited to the bottom of loch ness in scotland.
Judge : i haven't finished yet... the RIAA is gets 100 kazilion dollars to pay to the irish people or be fed to the leprechaun.
Ireland : Good idea, You can stay, see you at Kitty O’Shea’s

immunity? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671056)

I support sovereign immunity is going to an issue pretty quickly.

Re:immunity? (4, Informative)

Axalon (919693) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671062)

I was actually going to post something about that, but I looked it up and apparently Ireland doesn't have sovereign immunity [wikipedia.org].

Re:immunity? (2)

flaming error (1041742) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671138)

It's not just about "sovereign immunity", to me it raises questions of .jurisdiction. From your wikipedia link:

Not to be confused with the principle of public international law that the government of a state is normally not amenable before the courts of another state

Re:immunity? (3, Informative)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671364)

Well, Ireland is part of the EU and voluntarily subordinated its laws to those of the EU. So this sounds like a proper jurisdiction to me. If this court doesn't agree, then the suers have pretext to take up the case at the EU court level.

Hey, IRA: (5, Funny)

j35ter (895427) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671058)

Do good for your people; time to blow up a few lawyers...

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671090)

Interestingly enough I was going to ask more or less the same thing: 'Recording Industry: Do you really wanna piss off the guys who successfully pulled off a guerilla war in the British's backyard in an attempt to regain their freedom? This sounds like exactly the sort of thing they were there for :)

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

cluedweasel (832743) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671096)

You really don't want to go there do you?

Re:Hey, IRA: (2)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671240)

I don't think the music industry wants to go there (set foot in Ireland, that is). The British, who had their own empire ("the sun never sets on the British Empire"), who are well-known for their ability to 'deal' with indigenous populations of almost any nationality, have been trying, for centuries now, to effectively deal with the Irish.

That's the British, of all people. The previous empire that the US uses as a yardstick to gauge its current success. I'd love to know what the music industry is drinking that has them thinking that this will end well.

I mean, come on, it's not like the Irish know how to fight guerrilla wars in ways that make various infamous groups in the Middle East look like pacifists in comparison. ;-)

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671386)

Actually, the IRA look rather more pacifistic. They very often gave civilians time to evacuate before blowing up infrastructure. Not always, but that they did so at all makes them more pacifistic than the Middle Eastern groups.

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671418)

The IRA didn't (doesn't?) seek to kill civilians, just cripple the government. It's pretty obvious from their actions, such as sending warnings. They did mess up a few times, though.

Re:Hey, IRA: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671636)

The IRA didn't (doesn't?) seek to kill civilians, just cripple the government. It's pretty obvious from their actions, such as sending warnings. They did mess up a few times, though.

No, the IRA is a terrorist group just like Al Quaeda. There is no difference, non whatsoever.
Brigate Rosse, Read Army Faction, Action Directe, Basque terrorism, Al Quaeda. They are all terrorist groups and they apply violence in the pursuit of a political endgame. Just because the US likes to redefine what Al Quaeda is, so that it suits its own wars doesn't make it so.
Terrorist organisations always have political endgame (thats what makes them different from criminal organizations), and as many times in the past terrorist groups can be dealt with in 2ways : you either play the cat and mouse game and hope to eradicate them physically or you can "compromise" on the political field. The IRA never capitulated, it just took decades for a political compromise to surface. And then, only then did the IRA put down the weapons and let its political arm take the lead. In Spain for instance basque terrorism continues even to this day (yes actions are few but there still are attacks from time to time).
On the other hand the Brigate Rosse have been completely neutered after plunging Italy in what was called "the years of lead" in the 1970. 10 or more years of terrorism, a real war between the state and the BR with countless victims (including normal people). Action Directe was eradicated in France etc...

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671818)

The same could be said of the forefathers of the United States. Perhaps George Washington just wanted to be president (your political end-game)? His writings suggest otherwise.

Re:Hey, IRA: (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671728)

Wanna bet!
When I was there in the 80s, they usually only informed the government AFTER the attack so they could take credit for it.
Most of the attacks were on civilian targets. Malls, Town Squares, even a small town that was shelled with mortars for a couple of hours.
Checked with my family in the US, they couldn't get any news about even one of the attacks, even though it was all over the UK news.

I was even in a London shopping district right where they set off a car bomb about 20 minutes before it detonated. Fortunately it went early and didn't get anyone. (But not so early it got me.)

The IRA are just (or were, not sure what they are now) a terrorist organization trying to convince others they were freedom fighters. Freedom fighters attack government and military, not innocent civilians, that's what terrorists do. By the way, at least 80% of their targets when I was in the UK were random civilians.

So F-U !

Re:Hey, IRA: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671534)

Given it was the USA who were for years funding the Irish terrorists in Northern Ireland, the RIAA will end up having to sue the USA again

Re:Hey, IRA: (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671190)

Interestingly enough I was going to ask more or less the same thing: 'Recording Industry: Do you really wanna piss off the guys who successfully pulled off a guerilla war in the British's backyard in an attempt to regain their freedom? This sounds like exactly the sort of thing they were there for :)

Successfully ? You have a strange definition of successful. Their aim was a united Ireland, they do not have this . Only a pig shit ignorant American would use the word successfully in the context you have.

Re:Hey, IRA: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671620)

After several on-off ceasefires neither loyalists of the unionists got what they wanted, Eire and Northern Ireland are still two entirely seperate states. There's just slightly less shooting and blowing up going on. Britain still retains a lot of control over Northern Ireland and still maintains a minimal miltary precence there. Eire is still more or less under it's own steam.

So which part did the IRA actually manage to succeed with, after all that senseless and cowardly slaughter of not only their own people but UK mainland too?

Separation of Powers? (5, Insightful)

SYSS Mouse (694626) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671066)

This is the case of using judicial mean to "force" changes to the law itself, which is in the legislative area.

Re:Separation of Powers? (5, Informative)

lordholm (649770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671590)

I thought so to, but it turns out (if you read the article) that the suit is about that Ireland has not implemented certain items in Union legislation. Thus, a court proceeding for Ireland is entirely appropriate, especially since Union law have precedence. The court is then asked to look at whether Irish law is compliant with Union law, so the court cannot force the state to make new laws, they can however force the state to follow Union law.

For the non-european who have no idea about how it works (this is a simplified version): EU legislation can be seen as federal law, but most of the legislation (known as directives), are actually laws about that the states should make laws fulfilling a certain set of requirements. If a state does not implement "federal" directives in local legislation within the directive's implementation period, those individuals and companies that suffer some kind of damage that they would not have suffered if the law was implemented, have the right to sue the state for non compliance. This is a normal procedure; try to solve it locally at first, the next step is to take it up with the Union so they can start infringement procedures against the state. Normally, the courts would in this case ask for union level courts for an opinion of the compatibility between state and union law.

Wow... (3, Insightful)

jesseck (942036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671068)

So, what happened? I imagine this is a precursor to some sort of "treaty" or "trade agreement" with the US (since corporations run the country) and Ireland that will establish these "missing" laws.

What Are They Expecting? (5, Interesting)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671074)

Gee, government, not fondling the MAFIAA's nuts enough, so they hit you. Now, are you going to say "I walked into a door" and let them do it again, or are you going to man up?

You know what happens when you give a bully your lunch money? He threatens you for it the next day.

Know what happens when you give the MAFIAA a yard? They take a mile.

There is only one way to stop a bully. Stand up to him.

There is only one way to stop the MAFIAA. Cut copyright to 50 years, and tell them if they don't back the fuck off, you're going to cut it to 20 years.

Re:What Are They Expecting? (1)

j35ter (895427) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671092)

There is only one way to stop the MAFIAA. Cut copyright to 50 years, and tell them if they don't back the fuck off, you're going to cut it to 20 years.

No, replace copyright with something else. But, as greedy lawyers have an active hand in creating laws, I think this wont happen :(

Re:What Are They Expecting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671140)

Gee, government, not fondling the MAFIAA's nuts enough, so they hit you. Now, are you going to say "I walked into a door" and let them do it again, or are you going to man up?

You know what happens when you give a bully your lunch money? He threatens you for it the next day.

Know what happens when you give the MAFIAA a yard? They take a mile.

There is only one way to stop a bully. Stand up to him.

There is only one way to stop the MAFIAA. Cut copyright to 50 years, and tell them if they don't back the fuck off, you're going to cut it to 20 years.

They don't need to do that, though it would be nice. All they really need to do is say they'll play ball, and then ban the distribution, sale and download of any CD or individual song that the companies in the MAFIAA cartel own. The MAFIAA gets kicked in the teeth rather nicely that way, but they can't complain too much, since they demanded Ireland do something about piracy.

Re:What Are They Expecting? (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671232)

They don't need to do that, though it would be nice. All they really need to do is say they'll play ball, and then ban the distribution, sale and download of any CD or individual song that the companies in the MAFIAA cartel own..

And nothing of value is lost (for the oldies-and-goldies you could download the music without being a pirate: the copyright expired in that country anyway).

Re:What Are They Expecting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671164)

Can't you just cut it back to 20 years as a start, and if they whine, offer to cut it back to 7?

Re:What Are They Expecting? (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671166)

There is only one way to stop the MAFIAA. Cut copyright to 50 years, and tell them if they don't back the fuck off, you're going to cut it to 20 years.

That wont stop them, at best that will only slow them down. They'll happily keep suing even if copyright is cut to 3 months. Long copyrights aren't to protect older works, they are designed to protect newer works from having to compete with older works.

The best solution is to change copyright so that the cartels cant own copyrights rather they can be contracted for distribution by the actual content creators, ergo, cant sue over something they cant own. Then jailing any media exec who even thinks of getting out of line for life + 70 years.

Re:What Are They Expecting? (4, Interesting)

Jafafa Hots (580169) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671192)

How about just going back to the original length? 7 years.

Hell, we can even toss in the additional 7 year extension that you got if you applied, when that extension was added on at a later date.

If it was enough time for books being carted on horsedrawn wagons to a largely illiterate population to make money, it's enough time for your shit song and dumb assed movie to make money.

Re:What Are They Expecting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671204)

Cut copyright to 50 years, and tell them if they don't back the fuck off, you're going to cut it to 20 years.

50 years? 20 years?

How about 10 minutes?

Irish Gov should sue the music industry (5, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671102)

music industry is using a failing business model and costing the Irish Government lots of money in lost taxes from the music industry not adapting to the current business environment.

SImple solution (5, Funny)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671118)

Change the laws: copyright on music expires after 20 days. ISP have to block websites hosting infringing copies of music 3 weeks after being given written notice of the specific file/url/whatever to block. Of course once the copyright expires the block is no longer required (since it isn't infringing anymore).

Everyone wins!

pardon my ignorance (1)

guitardood (934630) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671134)

Does anyone know under what venue the summons was filed? Just wondering for my own information.

What about the real Pirates? (1)

falconcy (1082517) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671162)

When will the MAFIAA actually do the world a favour and go after the real pirates? I'm sure the Shipping Companies will help them with funds in their "Fight against Global Piracy" - why have they never tried to sue Somalia? Perhaps fitting out ships with big screens facing seawards which are constantly displaying FBI badged MAFIAA warnings on a constant loop would be an excellent deterrent for pirates. They should also stop making any more lame-assed movies which glorify piracy as this only encourages the masses to engage in their own acts of piracy.

What do you want MAFIAA to do? (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671526)

When will the MAFIAA actually do the world a favour and go after the real pirates?

Whoa, waitag*ddamminit !!!

Do you want MAFIAA to sue themselves???

Accelerando (4, Informative)

mr_snarf (807002) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671168)

The more I read about all this stuff going on, the more and more I think of Accelerando by Charles Stross. The description in the news of these companies makes them sound like organisms trying to compete in an artificial world, with less and less connection to reality. Soon their actions will be run by programs, and will eventually become sentient :P (Book is available free online if interested, see http://www.jus.uio.no/sisu/accelerando.charles_stross/ [jus.uio.no])

Business ties (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671172)

Very good summary of the situation in TFA. Ireland is popular with large global corporations for their low tax rates (maybe not quite so low anymore...) It will be interesting to see how this plays out with the potential for influence being leveraged against the Irish government by the music industry through their corporate cohorts as well as the pressures of complying with the EU copyright obligations. Here's to hoping Ireland finds a reasonable solution that keeps the legal machines at bay and doesn't require censorship or compromising the rights of their citizens.

There are a few responses... (1)

FairAndHateful (2522378) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671266)

I suppose Ireland could retaliate by severely reducing the length of copyright protection... But it would be almost as simple to just threaten to repeal this. [slashdot.org]

Causal Link (5, Informative)

mandelbr0t (1015855) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671280)

The crux of the case will lie in proving that there is a causal link between the lack of laws requiring ISPs to block websites, and the damages claimed. The precedent is Francovich v. Italy. However, given that the judge in a ruling against British Telecom forcing them to use Cleanfeed [wikipedia.org] to block access to websites like Newzbin and TPB acknowledge that tools to circumvent the system were available. And, in fact, Newzbin has released a client allowing access to their website despite the Cleanfeed block. The same software allows access to TPB. It relies on both encryption and the TOR network. Newzbin told BBC news that 93.5% of UK users have downloaded their Cleanfeed circumvention software. This flies in the face of the judge's comment that "Even assuming that they all have the ability to acquire [the means to circumvent Cleanfeed], it does not follow that they will all wish to expend the time and effort required."

93.5% of UK Newzbin users may not be "all" people in the UK who want to use file sharing networks, but it certainly means that establishing the causal link between lack of ISP blocking remedies and damages from file sharing will be difficult. People want access to those files, and Cleanfeed has proven largely ineffective at stopping two of the main sites involved in sharing. It should also be noted that these sites are not the actual hosters of the allegedly damaging files; they are merely portals to peer-to-peer networks that have other access methods available (e.g. DHT on BitTorrent). Again, the claim that blocking these websites would prevent financial damage is rather dubious.

Can somebody correct this for me ? (4, Interesting)

giorgist (1208992) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671284)

The music industry is suing a sovereign government in a court of law because of a law that does not exist ?
What next, sue voters for not ensuring their revenue stream ... hang on ... that is what they ARE doing ?!!?

So in their eyes I can be guilty for not successfully electing a government that ensures their income !!!

I am painting it every which way to try and make sense of this ...

I wish we could outlaw lawyers but considering that they would be enforcing that law, it may end the universe H2G2 style and replace it with something more bizarre.

Re:Can somebody correct this for me ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671610)

Their argument is: Ireland has to compensate me for not protecting my property. The first rule of capitalism is ownership and protection of property. The problem being copyright is an imaginary good manufactured by the government they are suing.

More potential revenue. (4, Interesting)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671310)

So not only do they blame the pirates themselves (because their actions may or may not result in a loss of potential profit), but they blame people (in this case, the government) who don't try to stop them (because, if they did stop them, they couldn't do something that may or may not result in a loss of potential profit)? I guess everyone's to blame, then. Clearly the people didn't try hard enough to force the government to pass such laws. Sue everyone!

This has been tried before (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671330)

The American government put a prohibition on consumption of alcohol, on the theory that if anti-drinking laws were in place the drinking would go away...

Give us back our public domain! (5, Insightful)

mykos (1627575) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671360)

Copyright is an artificial right that has been granted by the public to encourage the creation of works, with the understanding that those works will be contributed to the public domain in a reasonable amount of time. It is a bargain between creators and the general public.

We've lost the plot somewhere. 5-year copyright swelled to 7, 14, 28, 50, 75, 90, 120 years...

With each increase of copyright duration, the copyright lobbies have robbed the public of that much more creative works. We, the public, have fulfilled our end of the bargain, and we have granted a monopoly to the rights holders. They taken a tool we bought them, purchased with our tax dollars and our court system, and they have turned it into a weapon of control against us.

We have the power to take this weapon away from them any time we want--lobbyists and politicians be damned. Do not give these companies one cent. They are using what we gave them to exert ultimate control over us. Until they start giving back to the public domain, feel free to add "torrent" to any search for their creative works.

Re:Give us back our public domain! (3, Insightful)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671640)

I just don't understand why there is no world wide movement for requesting setting back copyright terms to 20 years? Even in UK 100 year law extention just passed. BBC article on it was wrote like PR bullshit from recording companies. That's what's happening - journalism ignores this issue (some of them willingly, some of them are not allowed to even think about it, but lots of them simply don't care, because it's "difficult" subject for beer/pizza/tv junkies to understand).

I say - we need 20 year limit back on track. With current media consumption it is more than enough for company to regain costs, and see if it's even are ready to regain costs. Argue that everyone can squeeze enough profit from 20 year term. Copyright cartel will hard time to explain why they need 100 years.

Re:Give us back our public domain! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671790)

I remember wondering, in my naive youth, why a movie or music company would want to own a media company. Then the other day I was thinking about opposing SOPA and Anderson Cooper came on tv and told me not to, so I went with that instead.

Re:Give us back our public domain! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671806)

There is such a movement! It's called the Pirate Party [wikipedia.org]. Currently smallish, but global and growing rapidly. Why not join?

So funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671374)

What the...? They are suing the government for not having some law? How is it even possible? :D Could i sue government for not having a law that tells them to give me some more money?

Re:So funny (1)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671544)

Only if you have enough money. Taking on governments, in their own court of law, is usually a no-win situation.

I didn't think there were any Irish lawyers... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671414)

Strange, I didn't think there were any Irish lawyers.

None of them can pass a bar.

Re:I didn't think there were any Irish lawyers... (1)

guitardood (934630) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671726)

Being part Irish, I find that comment rude, boorish and..... Impossible to deny.............LOL

Maybe the government should block roads? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671432)

I think that the government should block the road to and from my house so that anyone who steal my stuff can't transport it out!

It will also mean there are less cars which I will need to dodge on my bike, but that is just a side effect. :-)

Hey Music Industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671570)

All that money you're spending on lawyers... keep it instead and you'll probably have more money when all is said and done.

Wait... are they suing a country? Please Ireland... Declare war!!!

The state of human endeavour (1)

islisis (589694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671574)

And this is how the energy of the human race currently flows. Sustainability in a nutshell

Battle of the Book (5, Interesting)

o'reor (581921) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671606)

I don't think the music industry realizes that they're facing a war. And not a simple legal war, a real war with real weapons and casualties too. For, indeed:

Many hundreds of years before the GPL was even a twinkle in Richard Stallman's eye, an Irish monk proved to be an unlikely champion of the geeky A2K notion of access to knowledge. [...] and they settled things the way they did in those days, with 3000 people getting killed in the resulting battle.

The full article about Saint ColmCille and his fight for free access to knowledge and Copyleft is available here (PDF). [ed.ac.uk]

(and after all, if those lawyers working for the music industry are serious about that copyright shit, why don't they join the army and fight that battle on the front line, huh ? Hand me a banana bomb, there's a cluster of them coming our way...)

"Music industry"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38671618)

What parties are "the music industry" in this case?

Imagine the Precedence This Could Set (2)

guitardood (934630) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671756)

Imagine the entire populous of the US suing the government for not resolving the job situation? Or how about the copyright laws themselves? Maybe even suing for giving such a huge bailout to Wall Street and their ilk? It'll be pretty interesting to see what comes of this.

File sharing? So what? (5, Insightful)

Lost Race (681080) | more than 2 years ago | (#38671820)

So they say file sharing is killing the music industry. Even if they're right (and that's by no means a given) ... so what? People can still record and distribute music without any music industry. With computers and the Internet it's easy and pretty cheap. But even if somehow all musicians decided to stop recording and distributing ... again, so what? We can live without recorded music. All the money people currently spend on CDs would be spent on other entertainment instead, such as live performances.

Copyright is a tool for the benefit of society, not a natural right of artists (or the parasites who trick them into lopsided contracts) to make money. As far as music goes, there's just no measurable benefit to society to justify any significant effort or expense on copyright enforcement.

I say the proper response to this demand is to declare music to be outside the scope of copyright. Entertainers, learn your place and watch your step.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...