So, the good old "do something about the piracy Mr ISP" thing is taking an interesting turn in Ireland.
Over here, and in various other countries, the record companies and net firms are taking part in albeit slow going talks about the ISPs voluntarily taking on the pirates, in return for help launching their own all-you-can-eat digital music services, while both sides also lobby government about clarifying in statute an ISP's liabilities (or not) regarding monitoring and blocking the distribution of unlicensed content on the net.
But in Ireland they've all just gone legal. The four majors are suing two telecom companies - BT and UPC, the latter owners of the Chorus and NTL ISP companies in Ireland - with claims that by failing to combat the online infringement of their customers, under Irish copyright law the net companies are themselves liable for infringement claims.
It's an interesting area, of course, because the ISPs have been very keen from the word go to avoid liability for any illegal activity committed by their customers on their networks, and have normally successfully lobbied for exclusion from liability in any new laws that specifically deal with net-based crimes or unlawful acts.
Where copyright laws have been revised since the dawn of the internet, so in the US for example, 'safe harbour' clauses have normally been added to specifically restrict an ISP's liabilities for the infringing activity of their customers. In countries where copyright laws remain unchanged for the digital age, like the UK, the liabilities of the net firms have not generally been tested in court, mainly because few content owners are confident a judge would want to apply such liabilities to ISPs, in fear of opening the flood gates for claims, and in doing so making it impossible for net firms to operate.
But the Irish record industry reckons they have their country's law on their side, and that because the ISPs have turned down the labels' approaches to collaborate on the piracy problem, that a judge may well find in their favour.
Confirming legal action had been initiated, the MD of EMI Ireland, Willie Kavanagh, told Irish paper The Post: ''Under Irish copyright law, failure to do anything about illegal file-sharing makes UPC and BT part of the theft. We have sent both of these companies information which is proof positive that their systems are being used for illegal internet file sharing, and neither of them has been in any way co-operative with us about it. Therefore we have no other option than to sue them".
A spokesman for UPC, meanwhile, told reporters: ''Should proceedings commence, UPC intends to vigorously defend its position in court. UPC will not agree to a request that goes beyond what is currently provided under existing legislation. There is no basis under Irish law requiring ISPs to control, access or block the internet content its users download. In addition, the rights holders' proposal gives rise to serious concerns for data privacy and consumer contract law".
The latest label/ISP squabble in Ireland follows the previously reported out of court settlement between the record industry and major Irish ISP Eircom. Although the legal dispute was over various matters, the result was Eircom becoming one of the first ISPs in the world to agree to the controversial three-strike system which would see persistent file-sharers actually cut off. Insiders say that part of the record industry's three-strikes deal with Eircom was a commitment by the labels to try and make others in the net sector sign up to a similar anti-piracy programme, which may be part of the motivation behind the BT/UPC litigation. As far as I'm aware, while committing to a three-strike system, Eircom is yet to instigate any disconnections programme, though warning letters may have gone out.