Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

[Article] Music-swapping sites to be blocked by internet providers

1…91011121315»

Comments

  • #422
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    Bubba HoTep wrote: »
    no court involved

    The original article in this thread stated that eircom would not contest a court case, but a court would make the decision as to whether or not sites would be blocked. The request doesn't go from IRMA to eircom directly, it comes from a court order.

    This is different to the other IRMA/eircom agreement, where IRMA supply IP addresses of copyright infringers to eircom, and eircom warn and eventually disconnect repeat offenders. No court is involved in that decision.


  • #423
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Donald-Duck wrote: »
    Do you really think the IRMA will easily get the court orders?

    In this country, it depends how well you know the judge if you know what I mean ;)


  • #424
    Bubba HoTep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭Bubba HoTep


    jor el wrote: »
    The original article in this thread stated that eircom would not contest a court case, but a court would make the decision as to whether or not sites would be blocked. The request doesn't go from IRMA to eircom directly, it comes from a court order.

    This is different to the other IRMA/eircom agreement, where IRMA supply IP addresses of copyright infringers to eircom, and eircom warn and eventually disconnect repeat offenders. No court is involved in that decision.


    thats already been cleared up thanks to donald ducks links

    the situation seems to be this

    1st eircom said they would need a court order, and would fight it

    then eircom said they would do it simply at IRMAs request

    and now apparently they have gone back to position one


  • #425
    PaddyTheNth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 605 ✭✭✭PaddyTheNth


    Bubba HoTep wrote: »
    the situation seems to be this

    1st eircom said they would need a court order, and would fight it

    then eircom said they would do it simply at IRMAs request

    and now apparently they have gone back to position one
    No, you're getting confused between the disconnection/3 strikes issue and the website blocking (censorship) issue.

    Two different things.

    They (Eircom) were initially going to challenge the disconnection requests, then decided not to.

    They never - from what I have seen in any of the articles linked in this thread - said that they would challenge the court order for censorship, though they were originally going to block websites without such an order. How much of a formality an application for a court order which is never contested will be remains to be seen.


  • #426
    Bubba HoTep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭Bubba HoTep


    PaddyTheNth wrote: »
    No, you're getting confused between the disconnection/3 strikes issue and the website blocking (censorship) issue.

    Two different things.

    They (Eircom) were initially going to challenge the disconnection requests, then decided not to.

    They never - from what I have seen in any of the articles linked in this thread - said that they would challenge the court order for censorship, though they were originally going to block websites without such an order. How much of a formality an application for a court order which is never contested will be remains to be seen.


    thats what i said in my original post!


    lookit, as it stands IRMA wants eircom to censor the internet court order or not

    now what i want to know is what can be done about this?


  • Advertisement
  • #427
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    Bubba HoTep wrote: »
    now what i want to know is what can be done about this?

    Petition eircom to fight the court case, if and when it comes. Petition your ISP, if you're not with eircom, to fight any such action against them. Contact Digital Rights Ireland to see if there's anything being done, or to see if it can be started. Contact Ireland Offline group and see if there's anything they can do. Petition the minister for communications to get involved. Contact Comreg to see if there's anything they can do to get eircom to fight the court action. Contact the media to let them know of your concerns, and see if they're willing to get a public debate going. Radio shows like Jerry Ryan, Joe Duffy, Ray D'Arcy and The Last Word, would be a start.


  • #428
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,510 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    jor el wrote: »
    Petition eircom to fight the court case, if and when it comes. Petition your ISP, if you're not with eircom, to fight any such action against them. Contact Digital Rights Ireland to see if there's anything being done, or to see if it can be started. Contact Ireland Offline group and see if there's anything they can do. Petition the minister for communications to get involved. Contact Comreg to see if there's anything they can do to get eircom to fight the court action. Contact the media to let them know of your concerns, and see if they're willing to get a public debate going. Radio shows like Jerry Ryan, Joe Duffy, Ray D'Arcy and The Last Word, would be a start.

    Never a truer word said


  • #429
    Bubba HoTep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭Bubba HoTep


    jor el wrote: »
    Petition eircom to fight the court case, if and when it comes. Petition your ISP, if you're not with eircom, to fight any such action against them. Contact Digital Rights Ireland to see if there's anything being done, or to see if it can be started. Contact Ireland Offline group and see if there's anything they can do. Petition the minister for communications to get involved. Contact Comreg to see if there's anything they can do to get eircom to fight the court action. Contact the media to let them know of your concerns, and see if they're willing to get a public debate going. Radio shows like Jerry Ryan, Joe Duffy, Ray D'Arcy and The Last Word, would be a start.


    Cheers! :pac:

    i hope a few out there will join me, itll be a sad day when the net is censored:(


  • #430
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,332 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    jor el wrote: »
    Petition eircom to fight the court case, if and when it comes. Petition your ISP, if you're not with eircom, to fight any such action against them. Contact Digital Rights Ireland to see if there's anything being done, or to see if it can be started. Contact Ireland Offline group and see if there's anything they can do. Petition the minister for communications to get involved. Contact Comreg to see if there's anything they can do to get eircom to fight the court action. Contact the media to let them know of your concerns, and see if they're willing to get a public debate going. Radio shows like Jerry Ryan, Joe Duffy, Ray D'Arcy and The Last Word, would be a start.
    Can we create a new post and sticky that in the forum please with a suitable attention grabbing title.


  • #431
    Bubba HoTep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭Bubba HoTep


    thats an excellent idea!


  • Advertisement
  • #432
    Duiske
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,087 ✭✭✭Duiske


    Bubba HoTep wrote: »
    , and no they dont need a court order, eircom have stated they will comply with any request IRMA makes of them

    Can you please link to something/anything that can verify what you have highlighted in bold ?

    The situation is this. IRMA will apply to the courts for an order to compel Eircom (and possibly other ISP's) to discontinue access to certain sites over its network. Eircom have stated that they will not contest the application for this order. Therefore, its up to IRMA to convince the court that the sites referred to are actually doing something illegal.
    If IRMA are successful, and the order is granted, it will be served on Eircom, who will comply with it.

    And don't forget that the other ISP's may choose to contest these applications, and I'm sure that other interested parties may also like to get a word in.

    Anyway, my main point is that what you have said above is incorrect*

    *in bold because it needed to be said.

    Edit : Just seen your reply to Jor El.


  • #433
    Griffin87
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 275 ✭✭Griffin87


    i just found this

    im not sure if it was posted before i done a search and i couldnt find anyting.

    http://www.enn.ie/story/show/10125049

    you can view the letter that irma are sending to the isps


  • #434
    Orion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    Slashdot
    "The Australian Government's plan to introduce mandatory internet censorship has been scuttled, following an independent senator's decision to join the Greens and Opposition in blocking any legislation needed to start the scheme. Anti-Gambling Senator Nick Xenophon previously supported the filter because it could also block gambling web sites, but today withdrew support saying "the more evidence that's come out, the more questions there are on this". This week surveys found only less than 10% of Australians supported the censorship. Censorship Senator Stephen Conroy has consistently ignored advice from technical experts saying the filters would slow the internet, block legitimate sites, be easily bypassed and fall short of capturing all of the nasty content available online. Conroy expanded the list to block Adult R18+ and X18+ web sites, and this week said it would also block sites depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or "revolting and abhorrent phenomena" that "offend against the standards of morality". Last week an anti-abortion website was added to the blacklist, and Conroy said he was considering expanding the blacklist to 10,000 sites and beyond."

    This is where going down the censorship path brings you to. Who decides what is moral and what isn't? Thought police?


  • #435
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    A few good points there guys, but we're moving all discussion to the new sticky thread, over here.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement