Possible Irish SOPA Law? :/

Peanut

Decryptor wrote: »

That looks more like the MS Help icon...

Yeah not 100% sure about that one as the original source may have been somewhere else, still, I think the other ones are unequivocal.

Anyway it highlights another problem with this type of legislation - giving censorship control to content companies means a lot of collateral damage, and even worse is the chilling effect to new startups afraid to step on the toes of big business.

Picasa link works ok here (click on non-quoted link).

Rei-chan

I've got a Canadian citizenship. Now may be the time to use it...

MrVestek

Decryptor wrote: »

http://i.imgur.com/uHcVs.png

Number 3 - looks like the Windows help icon that you see when pressing F1 in most applications.

That's absolutely brilliant, fair play.

kris71

Rei-chan wrote: »

I've got a Canadian citizenship. Now may be the time to use it...

No escape as far as i know Canada is signing ASDA as well (can be wrong but thats what I heard)

MrVestek

kris71 wrote: »

No escape as far as i know Canada is signing ASDA as well (can be wrong but thats what I heard)

DOWN WITH PROVIDING CHEAP CONSUMER GOODS TO CANADA!

gavmcg92

This is depressing me now!

http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-and-eu-to-sign-controversial-acta-treaty-tomorrow-336764-Jan2012/

Ireland and EU to sign controversial ACTA treaty tomorrow

IRELAND IS TO sign a controversial international agreement tomorrow which promises a major international crackdown on the trade of counterfeit goods – and illegal internet filesharing.
Irish representatives will sign the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) at a ceremony tomorrow – as will representatives from each of the other 26 European Union member states, and the EU itself.
Once the agreement is signed, it can then be formally ratified and adopted into law once it has been cleared by the European Parliament. The treaty will be signed tomorrow in Tokyo by Ireland’s ambassador to Japan, John Neary.
Although the treaty is primarily aimed at stopping the trade of counterfeited physical goods, it contains provisions which demand that participating countries offer equal protection and enforcement procedures against digital copyright infringement.

• Read: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) in full – PDF >

The deal – which is unrelated to the controversial ‘Irish SOPA’ legislation – has been criticised by many, including the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, for its potential impact on privacy and freedom of expression.
Specifically, it sees member states agree to allow Internet Service Providers (ISPs) disclose a user’s information to a copyright holder, where the latter has a sufficient claim that the user is breaching their copyright.
No circumventing

It also says member states will have to offer “effective legal remedies” to ensure that anti-theft measures – such as the Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection on purchased music files – cannot be circumvented.
The clause could potentially mean that Apple, for example, would have to disable its MP3 recording facility in iTunes – because it could be used to remove the DRM protections from a piece of music purchased through its iTunes store.
Other critics of the treaty suggest that it will forbid the distribution of cheap generic drugs – because they would infringe the copyright of pharmaceutical companies whose research led to their discovery.
A European Commission spokesman said ACTA would not create new intellectual property rights, but would merely serve to enforce existing ones – and would not lead to constant monitoring of internet traffic.
Michele Neylon of Carlow-based internet hosting company Blacknight said the treaty could force internet hosts to deal directly with orders issued by copyright holders, instead of being able to ensure that such orders were handed down by a court.
“If we’ve been given a court order, fine – there’s no discussion, a judge has made a decision – but that’s not what happens, you don’t get your day in court.”
Neylon said it was a matter of “basic economics” that companies like his could not run up significant legal fees, ensuring that court procedures were followed, when those legal fees vastly exceeded the money it received to host sites in the first place.
He added that the current Irish legal situation, where there is no formal definition of ‘fair use’, meant even the likes of personal blogs could be subject to takedown orders if they included a company’s logo with permission, for example.
$200bn industry

The agreement is aimed at clamping down on the trade of counterfeit consumer and electronic goods, which the OECD believes was worth some $200 billion in 2007 – the equivalent of around 2 per cent of all legal trade worldwide that year.
All Irish government Departments will have to confirm that Ireland has the legal means to implement ACTA before it can be formally adopted.
A government spokesperson said, however, that Ireland did not expect to have to amend its current legislation – believing that the provisions of the deal were already accounted for in Irish law.
She added that negotiations on the deal had included representatives from the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and members from Ireland’s permanent representation at the EU in Brussels.
News of ACTA being ratified by Poland earlier this week drew the wrath of Anonymous and another group called Polish Underground, which attacked the websites of many government departments in protest at Poland’s signature of the treaty.
The United States, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Morocco – all of which took part in negotiating the treaty – signed up to ACTA in October of last year.
The European Union and Switzerland said at the time that they would offer their support for the treaty and would sign it as soon as was practicable.
Other interested countries can sign up to the deal before May 2013.

So much for this article anyway!
http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-government-rejects-suggestions-on-regulating-the-web-268660-Nov2011/

MajesticDonkey

Source?

gavmcg92

Decryptor wrote: »

Source?

http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-and-eu-to-sign-controversial-acta-treaty-tomorrow-336764-Jan2012/

MrVestek

He has this second posted the following statement on his Facebook profile:

Sean Sherlock wrote:

Legitimate Copyright Protection in Ireland: not SOPA – Sherlock

We all subscribe to the freedoms, the opportunities and the access to information that the Internet provides us with. Ireland is home to some of the world’s most innovative internet companies and we are determined to grow our reputation as a location where smart people and these smart companies can continue to innovate in this fast moving arena.
The last thing innovators need is a culture where the outputs of their creative endeavours have to be locked away or kept secret for the fear of theft. Ireland is very proud of the fact that we have a modern suite of intellectual property laws that by their very nature balance a range of competing interests and rights in a manner that is seen, right across the globe, as reasonable and proportionate.
Going right back to 22 December , 2002, the date by which every EU Member State had to have implemented Directive 2001/29/EC, every EU country has had to “ensure that rightholders are in a position to apply for an injunction against intermediaries whose services are used by third parties to infringe a copyright or related right”. Having that provision enshrined in EU law and the laws of Member States for a decade has not restricted the development of the Internet or innovative internet companies. On the contrary, the Internet has flourished.
It may be useful to explain the background against which the requirement for the amendment to the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 has arisen. In the EMI & others versus UPC High Court judgment of 11 October 2010, Mr Justice Charleton decided that he was constrained by the wording of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 and thus could not grant an injunction to prevent infringement of copyright against an information service provider (ISP) in the circumstances of “mere conduit” (transient communications). In doing so, he stated that Ireland had not fully transposed the relevant EU Directive(s). As you will appreciate, non-compliance with EU law is a very serious matter.
The “Mere conduit” principle provides that if an ISP does not initiate a transmission, or modify the material contained in a transmission and does not select the receiver of the transmission, it is granted a “safe harbour” against liability, by virtue of the e-Commerce Directive [2000/31/EC]. However, according to the same directive, this freedom from liability does not affect the power of the courts to require service providers to terminate or prevent copyright infringements.

As far as can be ascertained from the judgment (the State was not a party to the case), the type of injunction sought was to require UPC to prevent infringement of the record companies’ sound recording copyright, through its internet “peer-to-peer” services, possibly involving a “three strikes and you’re out” scenario. This is where the ISP sends three warnings of increasing severity and if the infringement continues, discontinues access to the Internet. It is sometimes referred to as a “graduated response”. I understand that blocking access to infringing online sites may also have been sought.

Two EU directives (the Copyright Directive 2001 and the Enforcement Directive 2004) require that the holders of copyright - authors, music composers, lyricists, record producers etc. - are in a position to apply for an injunction against intermediaries whose services are used by a third party to infringe a copyright or related right.

The Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation had considered that injunctions were available under Section 40 (4) of the Copyright Act and the inherent power of the courts to grant injunctions, which are equitable and discretionary remedies, granted according to settled principles, developed by the courts. However, this was not Mr Justice Charleton’s view. The record companies did not appeal the High Court decision and, consequently, the State has not had an opportunity to put forward its views on the legal principles involved nor on the construal of the relevant sub-sections of the Act, which we feel were not fully explored in the judgment.

The Attorney General’s Office was then asked (both by this Department and Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources) for its advice as to the implications of the High Court judgement. The prudent course, he advised, would be to introduce a Regulation to ensure compliance. After consultations with the Attorney General’s Office and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, this Department launched a public consultation on the text of the proposed Statutory Instrument. The consultation attracted over 50 submissions from interested parties. For the avoidance of doubt, the Government has decided to introduce a Statutory Instrument to restate the position that was considered to exist prior to this judgment.

Concerns have been expressed that the proposed Statutory Instrument mirrors the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the United States. These concerns are not based on fact. The purpose of the Statutory Instrument is simply to provide explicitly that injunctions may be sought, as obligated by the two EU Directives cited above. It should also be noted that such injunctions are available in all other Member States of the European Union by virtue of the two Directives already referred to. In granting such injunctions the courts must take account of Court of Justice of the European Union judgements. These require that a fair balance be struck between the various fundamental rights protected by the Community legal order and the principle of proportionality. That would include, inter alia, the protection of the fundamental rights of individuals who are affected by such measures, the freedom to conduct a business enjoyed by operators such as Internet Service Providers, the protection of private data and right of freedom of expression and information.

In proposing to amend the legislation, I am particularly conscious of the importance of online content and digital businesses in the Irish context and, accordingly, am simply seeking to ensure Ireland’s continued compliance with its obligations under the relevant EU Directives following the decision of the High Court in the aforementioned UPC case.

I trust that this information will clarify the issue.

Thanks for telling us about the past Mr TD... thanks for not clarifying how it's nothing like SOPA at all, but most importantly thank you for completely outlining the exact contents of this statutory instrument - ohh wait yeah you did none of that. Cheers.

Fierce amount of back-pedalling going on here lads...

MajesticDonkey

"A modern suite of intellectual property laws" - YOU MUST BE F**KING JOKING!

We have practically no sensible laws on copyright or data protection. This stupid legislation is making it less sensible.

Jev/N

Decryptor wrote: »

We have practically no sensible laws on copyright or data protection.

Have to argue with this point re Data Protection.

The Data Protection Commissioner asked Eircom to desist from continuing with their Three Strikes System on data protection grounds before Christmas.

This is diametrically opposed to the enforcement of copyright by a private agreement (which is currently being pushed towards having some legislative backing i.e. "Irish SOPA")

See TJ McIntyre's blog -

http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2012/01/christmas-and-new-year-privacy-roundup.html

gavmcg92

Reply to my email from Sean Kenny TD Labour

Hi there,

Thank you for your e-mail. There has been a lot of correspondence received on this issue, which I have been following very closely and which I will continue to do.
I have asked a Parliamentary Question this week seeking detailed information from Minister Sherlock's department on the issue, which should be answered in the coming days.

Minister Sherlock has issued a statement (see below my signature and contact information) about the issue to clarify what he is trying to do.

Yours sincerely,


__________________________
Seán Kenny, T.D.

KeithAFC

I have to agree with SOPA to a certain degree here. I think there is a lot of lost revenue for people who work hard and perhaps if this does come in, it might improve things for these people are who upset to be losing out on the money they feel they deserve.

Jesus Shaves

KeithAFC wrote: »

I have to agree with SOPA to a certain degree here. I think there is a lot of lost revenue for people who work hard and perhaps if this does come in, it might improve things for these people are who upset to be losing out on the money they feel they deserve.

troll

WolfForager

KeithAFC wrote: »

I have to agree with SOPA to a certain degree here. I think there is a lot of lost revenue for people who work hard and perhaps if this does come in, it might improve things for these people are who upset to be losing out on the money they feel they deserve.

I wish there was some sort of meme that would express my frustration with this comment.

Some sort of palm to face picture maybe.

KeithAFC

WolfForager wrote: »

I wish there was some sort of meme that would express my frustration with this comment.

Some sort of palm to face picture maybe.

Is it factually wrong? If you could fill me in with more information on it, that would be nice. It just seems to me this is what this story is about.

Mercurius

KeithAFC wrote: »

I have to agree with SOPA to a certain degree here. I think there is a lot of lost revenue for people who work hard and perhaps if this does come in, it might improve things for these people are who upset to be losing out on the money they feel they deserve.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY

WolfForager

KeithAFC wrote: »

Is it factually wrong? If you could fill me in with more information on it, that would be nice. It just seems to me this is what this story is about.

Oh factually your correct enough. It's just that the people who think they are losing out on revenue are the giants of the film and music industry, who instead of adapting to new forms of media such as streaming and the cloud would prefer to force individuals like you and me to pay ridiculous money for their products.

20+ euro for a blu ray? Please.
15 euro for an album? Heh.

Also corporations having enough power to shut down websites because they feel their copyright is being infringed upon is just plain ludicrous.

gavmcg92

WolfForager wrote: »

I wish there was some sort of meme that would express my frustration with this comment.

Some sort of palm to face picture maybe.

These have been feeding my appetite for the past few days... hope they help!

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lya9z2eBj41qzigy0o1_500.jpg

http://no****seansherlocktd.tumblr.com/page/2

gavmcg92

KeithAFC wrote: »

Is it factually wrong? If you could fill me in with more information on it,

Educate yourself! You're not in school anymore.

http://www.tjmcintyre.com/

KeithAFC

WolfForager wrote: »

Oh factually your correct enough. It's just that the people who think they are losing out on revenue are the giants of the film and music industry, who instead of adapting to new forms of media such as streaming and the cloud would prefer to force individuals like you and me to pay ridiculous money for their products.

20+ euro for a blu ray? Please.
15 euro for an album? Heh.

Also corporations having enough power to shut down websites because they feel their copyright is being infringed upon is just plain ludicrous.

Well that is exactly what I thought. So these people who work hard are losing revenue. So it is a case of people not getting paid what they should for illegal file sharing etc.

AlmightyCushion

KeithAFC wrote: »

I have to agree with SOPA to a certain degree here. I think there is a lot of lost revenue for people who work hard and perhaps if this does come in, it might improve things for these people are who upset to be losing out on the money they feel they deserve.

Piracy is very damaging and as you say it does result in a lot of lost revenue. SOPA and laws like it are not the way to stop it though.

Cantona's Collars

What's next-will car drivers not be allowed to turn radios above a certain volume or open the windows in case anyone else hears music without paying for it?

Irish politicians are so out of touch with reality it'd be laughable if it wasn't so serious.

@KeithAFC-Imagine you loved your local pub,say a couple of bad elements drank there but did no real harm.The law decided to shut the pub because of these guys,how would you feel? This is what is being proposed for the internet regarding this SOPA law.

CiaranC

KeithAFC wrote: »

Well that is exactly what I thought. So these people who work hard are losing revenue. So it is a case of people not getting paid what they should for illegal file sharing etc.

What they should? If I work hard grinding rocks into sand should I be entitled to make money selling it at the beach?

You are working on the assumption that these corporations are ENTITLED to make money, no matter what, regardless to the fact that their business model doesnt work. In fact they would rather legislate their failed business model back to life at the expense of our democratic freedoms rather than do what they are supposed to do in a free market society - adapt when the environment changes.

Frankly, I would rather see the entire music and movie business fail and every single person here who works in it out of a job than surrender our country to corporate influence like it is in the US.

MajesticDonkey

Well that is exactly what I thought. So these people who work hard are losing revenue. So it is a case of people not getting paid what they should for illegal file sharing etc.

CiaranC wrote: »

What they should? If I work hard grinding rocks into sand should I be entitled to make money selling it at the beach?

You are working on the assumption that these corporations are ENTITLED to make money, no matter what, regardless to the fact that their business model doesnt work. In fact they would rather legislate their failed business model back to life at the expense of our democratic freedoms rather than do what they are supposed to do in a free market society - adapt when the environment changes.

Frankly, I would rather see the entire music and movie business fail and every single person here who works in it out of a job than surrender our country to corporate influence like it is in the US.

TL;DR: f**k off.

KyussBishop

So basically, he is going ahead with the law, and he has 100% entirely ignored peoples concerns about freedom of speech etc. etc., and now we learn they are signing ACTA tomorrow as well (this was totally unclear; there has been a serious lack of information about all of this).

So, this is a huge deal, enormous; Poland has had a ****storm over this, protests with thousands and all, I think we need that here too and across much of Europe.

k.p.h

You would swear these people that are effected by copyright infringement were providing a service that was vital to humanity... Get ****ed ...

Copyright infringement is akin to only one thing greed.

If you have something to give to humanity and the only thing that motivates you to provide it is the fact that you have a copyright on it and you are going to get paid you can piss off because I don't want it.

Some how people have been tricked into thinking that people don't make music or movies unless they get paid astronomical amounts. Some how people have been tricked into thinking that technology or medicine dose not advance without copyrighting and people getting paid.

None of this is true, Most medical advances come from funding of private institutions and universities by governments and tax payers money, the UNIX based technology that most of the internet is run on is free developed buy the open sourced community's. Music has and will be made by millions of people world wide for free every day of the week. Movies can be made on far more modest budgets than people let on.

The only people who benefit anyway from these Laws are the people who rake in the cash, and the people who want to control what you do and charge you for doing it.

There is now a charge for living in this county, an implied tax for being born. What's next.

Get paid, get ****ed ..

seantorious

KeithAFC wrote: »

Well that is exactly what I thought. So these people who work hard are losing revenue. So it is a case of people not getting paid what they should for illegal file sharing etc.

It isn't all about money you know, this gives a ridiculous amount of power to people who are only interested in money. Movie and music companies don't give a toss about personal freedoms and many laws protecting us. Use sony's use of illegal tracking software in movies as an example.

stupidusername

I'm not saying I agree with this, but at the same time I do agree that if the entire world downloaded everything they needed without paying for it, there just plain wouldn't be any films / songs etc made. Surely this makes sense to people, yeah?

but anyway, this is some scary ass shit going on. Is there anything anybody can do at this point to stop this going ahead?

Herb Powell