Record Labels Make The Case That Irish ISP Is Guilty Of Copyright Infringement
from the inducing-a-joke dept
A few different readers sent in the latest on the lawsuit that the major record labels have filed against Irish ISP Eircom. While the adversarial relationship between ISPs and the recording industry has been discussed for years, this is the first case in which the labels are directly suing an ISP for copyright infringement. Their argument, similar to the "inducement" rule that the US courts made up (it's not actually in any US law) is that Eircom was actively encouraging piracy. In the case, they used internal emails from Eircom execs where some execs jokingly talked about how piracy was good for musicians because it would reduce money for rock stars to spend on cocaine. Apparently, obviously joking comments are being used to establish intent these days. Either way, this seems like a weak case for the record labels. Plenty of people encourage piracy. It's not going to go away if all those people shut up. The industry needs to stop freaking out over the fact that piracy happens, and start focusing on actual solutions in the market.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, ireland, isps, liability
Companies: eircom, ifpi
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Screw them!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blackmail
The content of the emails was basically correct -- file sharing can help musicians. Perhaps the RIAA will be providing some publicity for that point with this lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joking with intent
Wasn't it the two Enron execs on the phone talking about f*cking over grandmas with the price gouging they were gonna cause and laughing about it the whole time. Sure, they were joking with each other, but the plan was real, as we now know. If you never heard the recordings, it is quite disgusting. I have to go to staff meeting so I don't have time to find a link.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Relevance?
Is talking about something the same as actively promoting something?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SUE ME!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Blackmail
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Blackmail
It's a lot easier to sue a student who cannot afford a lawyer than a corporation that will unleash a field of lawyers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Surely the Record Labels have turned this into a promotion by choosing the ridiculous lawsuit route.
The irony is, that Eircom have used the prospect downloading music (though specifying legal downloads) as advertisements for their broadband offerings for years. This would have made a more serious case, but none the less easy to defend against in the court of common sense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Blackmail
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Road Dangers
Headline: Scared Driver v Joe's Asphalt: An EPIC Slander-DUI-Personal Endangerment-Drug Trafficking lawsuit for damages totaling 1 Bagillion dollars.
Wish me luck
[ link to this | view in thread ]
reality check
Garry -- these were emails by company execs, and as part of the company's "control group," anything they say is binding on the company. There have been lots of cases where execs making light of a situation are used to establish knowledge and/or intent. Disclaimers built into email footers, first are not typically used for internal emails, and second don't really matter much when it comes to something like this.
And Mike -- you say "similar to the 'inducement' rule that the US courts made up (it's not actually in any US law)." This country is a common law country, always has been, and unlike civil code countries, we don't enshrine every single possible variant of every single rule or law into our statutes. Courts share the task with legislatures of working out what the laws are and what they mean. It's been that way in common law countries for hundreds of years before this country was founded, and our nation's founders expressly adopted that system over the Napoleonic code system used in, among other places, France and Italy.
Moreover, our courts have both legal and equitable powers, again something that is part of the common law system. Long ago we merged the two, so instead of having separate courts of law and equity, all courts are both, all judges have both powers. The concept of inducement is one of those common law doctrines that originated in courts of equity, where it has been used as both a defense (e.g., to a claim of breach of contract), and as support for a claim (e.g., certain forms of aiding and abetting).
So while I agree with your general point, this comment is not only off the mark, it doesn't even come close to the target. The only issue is what the elements ought to be for a claim of inducement when it comes to copyright infringment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
a big email mistake
An Illinois man left the snowballed streets of Chicago for a vacation in Florida. http://www.jordansport2.com/Jordan_IV_sneaker.html Jordan IV sneaker His wife was on a business trip and was planning to meet him there the next day. When he reached his hotel, he decided to send his wife a quick e-mail.
Unable to find the scrap of paper on which he had written her e-mail address,
he did his best to type it in from memory. Unfortunately, he missed one letter http://www.jordansport2.com/Jordan_V_sneaker.html Jordan V sneaker , and his note was directed instead to an elderly preacher's wife whose husband had passed away only the day before. When the grieving widow checked her e-mail, she took one look at the monitor, let out a piercing scream, and fell to the floor dead.
At the sound, her family rushed into the room and saw this note on the screen:
Dearest Wife,
Just got checked in. Everything prepared for your arrival tomorrow.
Your Loving Husband.
[ link to this | view in thread ]