Blackout Ireland

Would this thread not be more at home in Current Affairs? Anyway, fair play Dahamsta, I'll lend my support with the avatar and will have a think about what could be done once I've finished my impending dinner!

By way of background for those who may be somewhat unfamiliar with what's happening, I give you a good article by an ex-lecturer of mine, TJ McIntyre. It was in Sunday's Business Post. I think it's worth quoting in full rather than just linking. (the link is in the title anyway if you want it.)

Internet �death penalties� unacceptable

Quote:

A private deal between the music industry and Eircom could lead to innocent internet users being denied access, writes TJ McIntyre.

Banning someone from internet use is a draconian punishment.

In an era where internet access is increasingly essential - whether to send an e-mail, look for a job or book a flight - to deprive a person of this basic right is seriously to disrupt their daily life.

In fact, an internet ban is such a serious sanction that the Irish courts have only ever imposed it in extreme cases involving child pornography.

Yet in a private deal between Eircom and the music industry - a deal which the music industry is now trying to force on other Irish internet service providers (ISPs) - internet bans may become commonplace.

The deal has been called �three strikes and you�re out�, but it might better be called �three accusations and you�re out� - as there would be no trial, no evidence held up to court scrutiny and no right of appeal for convicted users.

Instead, once the music industry makes three allegations that a particular internet user is sharing music, Eircom will disconnect that user, applying what�s often called an internet �death penalty�.

What might this deal mean for the internet in Ireland? We can certainly expect users to be wrongfully accused. The company that the music industry previously used to identify filesharers - MediaSentry - has a questionable track record, and was recently found to be operating illegally in several US states.

The music industry has recently turned to Danish firm Dtecnet - though the inherent unreliability of this process may remain.

But there is also the issue of people being falsely accused - because someone else could use a wireless modem connection if its password was insecure.

This means that a neighbour or passerby could use broadband without permission. Should they face an internet ban for the actions of somebody piggybacking on their wireless?

This reflects a broader problem, where innocent third parties will be affected. Internet connections are not generally unique to an individual. Instead they�re shared - among families and flatmates, for example. But three accusations will mean the connection will be shut off for every user, so others will suffer based on the alleged wrongdoing of another. The deal is also undemocratic.

The European Parliament recently rejected a scheme to disconnect users based on mere accusations. In Britain, similar proposals were ultimately rejected after public consultations and open debate. Here, however, the music industry is trying to foist this system on ISPs in a private deal, while bypassing scrutiny by the Oireachtas and the Department of Communications.

In another part of this deal, as well as disconnecting users, the music industry also wants Irish ISPs to impose a second type of internet death penalty, by preventing Irish users from reading certain websites. This time there is pretence of legal cover, in that the obligation would be to block websites only where a court order is granted - but the music industry has threatened to sue any ISP that opposes such an order, meaning that any court will hear only one side of the story.

The result, if this scheme is allowed to proceed, will be to make ISPs responsible for censoring what their users can view on the internet.

If this precedent is set for the music industry, expect others to follow soon after.

The publishing industry, for example, might target Google�s Book Search project which, it has claimed, infringes copyright.

The Church of Scientology already has a track record of trying to silence criticism by claiming that its copyright is infringed by certain sites. Diebold - a US manufacturer of electronic voting machines - was found guilty by the US courts of abusing copyright law to shut down internet sites, in order to conceal flaws in its technology.

If Irish ISPs become internet censors, then similar plaintiffs can be expected to try their luck here.

Quite apart from civil liberties concerns, there are also commercial costs. If this deal is allowed to proceed, it will harm Ireland�s reputation as an internet-friendly country.

Requiring companies to police the actions of their users and censor what users can see - a duty which they are not subject to in other jurisdictions, such as the United States - will drive up costs (for both company and user), harm inward investment and encourage technology firms to relocate.

In short, this deal is an unacceptable threat to Irish internet users and businesses. Fortunately, so far only Eircom has signed up. Other ISPs are still considering whether to cave in to the threats of the music industry.

There is still time for them to do the right thing - and say no to a privatised internet death penalty.

Also, the Digital Rights Ireland site is worth checking out for anyone who's interested in more.