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

Possible Irish SOPA Law? :/

Options
1235725

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,921 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    http://i.imgur.com/xGqSJ.jpg

    except the roles are reversed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 239 ✭✭Gman1


    About to send this:

    Dear Mr. Sherlock,
    From the various comments you have made on the upcoming law which will force ISPs to block access to certain websites you have repeatedly stated that you have emailed/phoned companies such as EMI to personally assure them that you are doing your damnedest to protect their interests. Yet you won't show the same decency to the average Irish citizen and take two minutes out of your day to answer any of the numerous emails sent by myself and others regarding this law.
    It's nice to know that elected officials can make the time to assure big business that their best interests are being looked after but you don't have the decency to take 30 seconds of your time to send a dimple email saying that you are considering all aspects of the issue.
    I have on numerous times tried calling but have yet to be put through to you a d the promises of a call back have yet to be followed through.
    If I do not receive a reply to this email I will be visiting your office in person to discuss this issue. I will also be contacting newspapers and informing them of your lack of response to anyone who has contacted you to point out the serious faults in this law which will destroy our emerging tech industry.

    Yours

    I cc'd editors and newspapers when I emailed Sherlock. No luck!

    Also this lawyer got some talk out of him:
    http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2012/01/adrian-weckler-confims-that-irelands.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    This is like Anglo all over again. It's not like Sherlock doesn't know what he's doing. Something more needs to be done. Anyway we can get him onto the TV? Have him explain why he intends wrecking jobs and setting the country back ten years.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 239 ✭✭Gman1


    This is like Anglo all over again. It's not like Sherlock doesn't know what he's doing. Something more needs to be done. Anyway we can get him onto the TV? Have him explain why he intends wrecking jobs and setting the country back ten years.

    Stacy Herbertjust tweeted this:



    If the Irish weren't able to prevent tens of billions being transferred to unsecured bondholders of Anglo Irish,can they stop their SOPA?



    And your right about the jobs! Google, Facebook and the others will pack their bags and leave


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,303 ✭✭✭Temptamperu




  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭Trevor451


    Looks like after the megaupload takedown, file sharing sites are starting to self censor themselves :o

    http://markets.financialcontent.com/mng-ba.mercurynews/news/read?GUID=20222568


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,051 ✭✭✭bealtine


    Et voilá

    You can bet boards.ie will be one of the targets, evil and nasty and fighting the will of the good guys like EMI and IRMA...

    This is not about piracy,we don't ban roads because criminals use them to drive away from bank robberies or say there's a lot of crime in Limerick so the road won't go there...

    This is simply a land grab by the "entertainment" industry to control vast swathes of the internet.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    How will this legislation effect jobs??


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,677 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    batistuta9 wrote: »
    where did you get that list?

    i seen one the other day that was far smaller & two companies that i remembered from it aren't even on the list you gave

    I got it from reddit.com. Which two companies were they? Bear in mind I didn't say it was a list of all companies supporting it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭CiaranC


    44leto wrote: »
    How will this legislation effect jobs??

    Why dont you read the thread? It will not be viable for a business like Google to operate in Ireland if this legislation passes.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,677 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    44leto wrote: »
    How will this legislation effect jobs??

    A lot of if sites like youtube and google are forced to shut down. Obviously that won't likely happen, but in theory this new legislation would give US lawmakers the power to do things like that


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,521 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    how in the blue hell can you make that comparison to downloading? :confused:


    you alright mate?


    I didn't make a comparison. You obviously don't know what a comparison is.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    About to send this:


    It's nice to know that elected officials can make the time to assure big business that their best interests are being looked after but you don't have the decency to take 30 seconds of your time to send a dimple email saying that you are considering all aspects of the issue.

    Don't be confusing the lad....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Daftendirekt


    44leto wrote: »
    How will this legislation effect jobs??

    It forces website owners to police whatever content users upload or link to.

    So if I were to put a link to Megavideo here, Boards would be responsible, and the IP owners could seek a court order to force the ISP's to block it. (Something along those lines anyway.)

    Think of the climate this would create for the tech industry in Ireland. Sites like YouTube simply can't monitor everything that's uploaded to it, not to mention Google. I don't see any reason to presume Email providers would be exempt, either. Wikipedia is a site that's completely dependent on users uploading content, and even though it actively tries to prevent any copyright infringement, any randomer linking to a dodgy site could leave it exposed.

    No one would be crazy enough to try and build a new tech start-up knowing that they could be shut down at the whim of EMI.

    If this all sounds completely bonkers, it's important to bear in mind that the people pushing for this don't necessarily know the first thing about the net or how it works.

    They've got the content industry whispering in their ear that piracy is hurting them and something, anything has to be done to stop it. In reality, while piracy is hurting them to an extent, a lot of the damage is self inflicted - their ultimate goal is to protect their traditional revenue streams. At any cost. So rather than update their business model, they're taking the easier route of lobbying well-meaning but woefully misguided politicians, who probably don't even recognise the severity of what's being proposed. They probably do think that this will protect jobs and prevent piracy, while being completely oblivious to the damage it'll do.

    I know it sounds horribly conspiracy theory-ish to say it, but this new trend of extremely draconian anti-piracy legislation really is about Internet censorship. The Internet has damaged the content industry's monopoly, but not through piracy. It's given consumers greater choice as to what to buy and where to buy from and for the first time content creators (artists, musicians, film-makers and the like) are able to reach their target markets directly and on their own terms, effectively cutting out the need for a middle-man.

    So of course, EMI and co aren't happy with that.

    People's problem with this kind of legislation isn't that it'll prevent them from getting free stuff (people are still more than happy to pay for music, they're just buying it in a different format) or that they're opposed to the idea of intellectual property. The problem is that this is legislation that's being passed for the sole purpose of keeping a group of lobbyists happy at the expense of Ireland, and quite possibly its economic recovery.

    It's a classic example of big business having too much influence over our elected officials. People need to remind them who they're accountable to at the end of the day.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,099 ✭✭✭✭RobbingBandit


    It's time we face facts in this country we are the guinea pig for any and all new innovations like this in Europe for as long as we are in debt to the overlords. Greece, Spain or Italy would riot if anything like this was proposed for them, we will bitch and moan but accept it with ass cheeks spread while Germany and France accept Google, Facebook, Paypal and all others based here with open arms.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    I didn't make a comparison. You obviously don't know what a comparison is.

    we're talking about downloading. You mention killing people. In reference to my "call a spade a spade" comment.


    downloading >>> murder :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭generalmiaow


    It's time we face facts in this country we are the guinea pig for any and all new innovations like this in Europe for as long as we are in debt to the overlords. Greece, Spain or Italy would riot if anything like this was proposed for them, we will bitch and moan but accept it with ass cheeks spread while Germany and France accept Google, Facebook, Paypal and all others based here with open arms.

    That's not exactly true. France, Italy and Denmark and the UK all have similar laws to this. Germany narrowly avoided it and seems to be moving in the direction of copyright reform instead.

    It's extremely frustrating trying to find out information about this proposed legislation. From what I can see, nobody has any idea about it except that it's a reaction to the government being unable to respond to industry requests to block sites. However, I hold hope that the reaction from the technology industry to SOPA in the last week might turn a few heads. Facebook are planning to double their employees in Dublin and they were opposed to the US legislation (they are having enough trouble with the data protection act here as it is) so any tech industry consultation these legislators have will hopefully result in some opposition.

    The entertainment industry does not hold any promise for the economic future of Ireland compared to technology, and this should be obvious. It shouldn't come down to which industry is better than which though, there's a very sound engineering principle as well as a social contract that should take precedence.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,921 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    People abroad could launch DoS attacks on many Irish blog and community sites by pasting content banned in Ireland but perfectly legal in their country which had more freedom of speech.

    Unless the new laws had a safe harbour provision EVERY comment and attachment could have to be moderated before being visible.



    In other news
    sales of SUV's and Houses has dropped somewhat since 2006 too


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    It forces website owners to police whatever content users upload or link to.

    So if I were to put a link to Megavideo here, Boards would be responsible, and the IP owners could seek a court order to force the ISP's to block it. (Something along those lines anyway.)

    Think of the climate this would create for the tech industry in Ireland. Sites like YouTube simply can't monitor everything that's uploaded to it, not to mention Google. I don't see any reason to presume Email providers would be exempt, either. Wikipedia is a site that's completely dependent on users uploading content, and even though it actively tries to prevent any copyright infringement, any randomer linking to a dodgy site could leave it exposed.

    No one would be crazy enough to try and build a new tech start-up knowing that they could be shut down at the whim of EMI.

    If this all sounds completely bonkers, it's important to bear in mind that the people pushing for this don't necessarily know the first thing about the net or how it works.

    They've got the content industry whispering in their ear that piracy is hurting them and something, anything has to be done to stop it. In reality, while piracy is hurting them to an extent, a lot of the damage is self inflicted - their ultimate goal is to protect their traditional revenue streams. At any cost. So rather than update their business model, they're taking the easier route of lobbying well-meaning but woefully misguided politicians, who probably don't even recognise the severity of what's being proposed. They probably do think that this will protect jobs and prevent piracy, while being completely oblivious to the damage it'll do.

    I know it sounds horribly conspiracy theory-ish to say it, but this new trend of extremely draconian anti-piracy legislation really is about Internet censorship. The Internet has damaged the content industry's monopoly, but not through piracy. It's given consumers greater choice as to what to buy and where to buy from and for the first time content creators (artists, musicians, film-makers and the like) are able to reach their target markets directly and on their own terms, effectively cutting out the need for a middle-man.

    So of course, EMI and co aren't happy with that.

    People's problem with this kind of legislation isn't that it'll prevent them from getting free stuff (people are still more than happy to pay for music, they're just buying it in a different format) or that they're opposed to the idea of intellectual property. The problem is that this is legislation that's being passed for the sole purpose of keeping a group of lobbyists happy at the expense of Ireland, and quite possibly its economic recovery.

    It's a classic example of big business having too much influence over our elected officials. People need to remind them who they're accountable to at the end of the day.

    A great post and succinctly put. But the government is losing revenue as well, I can give you one absolute concrete fact, I am spending a hell of alot less money on media, I am illegally downloading it, or file sharing (whatever) I know I am not the only one doing this.

    So to be frank piracy and people like me have to be stopped. That in the long run will cost very real jobs. But this law does sound very heavy handed and I don't think it will pass. It doesn't seem workable, a law will only work if it is enforcible, this will not be. Its like Ryan giggs trying to sue Twitter, twitter cannot be responsible for everything an anonymous member uploads or posts. The same happened with that taxi fare dodging "court case".


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭dillo2k10


    I assume the legislation would only allow them to block websites that contain copy righted material.

    So say they bring UPC to court and force them to ban youtube.com then a new website appears called youtube.ie which just the exact same. They would have to go through the process all over again (assuming UPC continued to fight them in court) would it continue to be worth their while?

    I would hope that UPC would continue to fight it, and I think they would because they know that they will loose a lot of customers that are on the high packages who would drop down to the lower ones or move to another provider.

    Would it not also be possible to use proxys to get around the block too?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,921 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    44leto wrote: »
    A great post and succinctly put. But the government is losing revenue as well, I can give you one absolute concrete fact, I am spending a hell of alot less money on media, I am illegally downloading it, or file sharing (whatever) I know I am not the only one doing this.
    Unless you are banking the money you claim not to have spent on media you are still spending it on something and chances are that the government get it's VAT anyway. But more likely you are spending the money on local goods and services so the government gets further cuts in wages etc , when otherwise you would be sending the money abroad to the rights holders.

    So I'd say in most cases the government gets as much if not more money from downloaders.


    Where the government looses out in tax take is when people legally import media from other EU member states, and small imports under the tax limit from abroad. Or download it on line from itunes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭generalmiaow


    dillo2k10 wrote: »
    Would it not also be possible to use proxys to get around the block too?

    That's exactly the point. There is literally NO WAY to completely block access to a website. Once you have an endpoint outside the country and an encrypted connection to it (this is not difficult at all, and in fact happens every time you use a credit card) a block means nothing. In countries such as China and Saudi Arabia where internet access is restricted, people continue using blocked sites as normal. It's lip service.

    People bringing up the "piracy is wrong" argument in this thread are missing the point - this won't affect piracy in the slightest. Whatever the ethics of it, the entire entertainment industry as it exists now at death's door - some say, because of piracy, but it's not coming back because some judge can order a DNS block or even an IP block.

    The problem is not just the matter of principle - free commerce of information over any medium - it's that it complicates the technology to the point where it can discourage investment and innovation. To implement something like a country wide block you have to do it at every exit node from Ireland which doesn't exist and is a monumental waste of time. With things like content distribution networks where you don't even know what country a server which has something on it is in at any time, which could even be seconds.Plenty of infringing content is distributed by the big CDNs that also carry mostly legit traffic.

    It's like they are building a fence to keep out flies. That looks awful.

    And that means discouraging jobs. If Sean Sherlock thinks he can raise enough money from the taxes on CDs, which won't even exist in a few years, to pay for the welfare of all those who will miss out on employment opportunities he is dead wrong. Forget Google and Facebook for a second - how do you think an Irish entrepreneur who has an idea for a great website would see this?

    Sorry, entertainment industry, but I can live without Beyonce or The Kardashians or Die Hard 5 or whatever else. They are not worth the tiny chance of saving if it jeopardises the fastest growing industry in Ireland.

    My job depends both on the internet and on the music industry. Piracy has an effect on my livelihood as well and attitudes to it will need to change, but that will come from Netflix and Steam and other distribution methods that emphasise convenience and a social aspect (as well as sharing, in a way that still pays for the content) and break from the old ways. There's tons of opportunities in there for Ireland to make creativity profitable again but they won't happen if policy makers ruin it for us.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    Unless you are banking the money you claim not to have spent on media you are still spending it on something and chances are that the government get it's VAT anyway. But more likely you are spending the money on local goods and services so the government gets further cuts in wages etc , when otherwise you would be sending the money abroad to the rights holders.

    So I'd say in most cases the government gets as much if not more money from downloaders.


    Where the government looses out in tax take is when people legally import media from other EU member states, and small imports under the tax limit from abroad. Or download it on line.

    Really well I am self employed so could I use that excuse for not paying taxes "I am spending it on other things" or how about when a person buys smuggled cigarettes to avoid the duty.

    Media has the effect of creating desire, we will always find money for it, but now it is all free.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,921 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Blocking downloads will probably cause people to buy more pirate DVD's.

    Who actually thinks the freeloaders will pay full retail price if they can find any alternative ?




    One of the main sources of pirate DVD's is criminals (in Ireland especially this includes paramilitaries). If you don't believe me look at the ads at the start of any DVD , and cast your mind back to DVD's being sold in one day markets down the country

    In the past the Govt. used to pay a lot to provide Garda and Army escorts for cash transfers to prevent the paramilitaries getting money that way.

    IMHO one of the unintended consequences of this legislation could possibly be an increase in funding to dissidents. If this were the case then the Govt. would have to spend to prevent this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    Blocking downloads will probably cause people to buy more pirate DVD's.

    Who actually thinks the freeloaders will pay full retail price if they can find any alternative ?

    Totally agree.
    If major sites were shut down (open torrent trackers, etc) it would make the average joe internet user just buy black market dvds.

    I personally think it was broadband that did away with the dvd black market. I know they are still around but nothing compared to before broadband. Downloading a 700mb rip was just to much on dial up.
    But now that people have gotten used to downloading very good quality rips and if that was taken away ... someone would step in to provide ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    Blocking downloads will probably cause people to buy more pirate DVD's.

    Who actually thinks the freeloaders will pay full retail price if they can find any alternative ?




    One of the main sources of pirate DVD's is criminals (in Ireland especially this includes paramilitaries). If you don't believe me look at the ads at the start of any DVD , and cast your mind back to DVD's being sold in one day markets down the country

    In the past the Govt. used to pay a lot to provide Garda and Army escorts for cash transfers to prevent the paramilitaries getting money that way.

    IMHO one of the unintended consequences of this legislation could possibly be an increase in funding to dissidents. If this were the case then the Govt. would have to spend to prevent this.

    No rubbish, I only download the Blurays and I never bought one of those. I am now even downloading books.

    I bought the latest Pinker on amazon "The better angels of our nature" I know the irony, it is a hardback with 800 pages, I didn't like the weight of it. So I decided to take the hit and download the ebook. But low and behold, I got a pirate version FREE, I also got a talking book version FREE, I even recognise this as ridicules and detrimental to the long term media development and industry.

    Piracy will get worse they have to make a stand. But this is probably not the way to do it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Daftendirekt


    44leto wrote: »
    A great post and succinctly put. But the government is losing revenue as well, I can give you one absolute concrete fact, I am spending a hell of alot less money on media, I am illegally downloading it, or file sharing (whatever) I know I am not the only one doing this.

    Okay, that's fair enough. I'm not opposed to the idea of protecting intellectual property, but there's a couple of points I'd like to mention.

    The content industry likes to claim every download as a lost sale. So if you download a thousand MP3's that you could otherwise buy on Amazon or iTunes for, let's say, €1 each, then the record labels like to make out that you've stolen €1,000 worth of music from them (I believe they value every illegally downloaded MP3 higher than that in reality, but that's beside the point). I'll concede that if you would have otherwise bought the MP3's, then that could fairly be counted as a lost sale, but how much of your downloading is opportunistic?

    If you make a copy of something (and I'd challenge the notion of copying as being the same as theft) that you would never have bought in the first place, you aren't depriving the IP owner of anything, material or monetary. Apply this logic across the board, to everybody who illegally downloads, and I think the number of declining sales being chalked up to piracy would take a pretty huge dent.

    You've probably spotted the obvious problem with this: any legislation built on this same reasoning would be utterly unenforceable. There's just no way you could prove someone would or wouldn't have purchased something had they not been able to pirate it. So rather than err on the side of fairness, legislators are leaning towards excessively blunt legislation with (in my opinion at least) insanely harsh punishments for non-compliance.

    I agree with you that IP needs to be protected, but do you really think prison sentences and million-dollar-plus fines are an appropriate penalty for breaking such arbitrary rules? Or that censorship laws that might shut down legitimate businesses (without necessarily making much of a dent in piracy) are an acceptable solution?

    To me, it looks like a case of private profits taking precedence over justice.
    So to be frank piracy and people like me have to be stopped. That in the long run will cost very real jobs. But this law does sound very heavy handed and I don't think it will pass. It doesn't seem workable, a law will only work if it is enforcible, this will not be. Its like Ryan giggs trying to sue Twitter, twitter cannot be responsible for everything an anonymous member uploads or posts. The same happened with that taxi fare dodging "court case".
    It should be unenforceable, but like I said above, the danger is in its bluntness. If you have money, no regard for due process, access to elected politicians and an ethical code that was shaped by a world without the Internet, I think you could make a pretty good go of it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,514 ✭✭✭PseudoFamous


    It's time we face facts in this country we are the guinea pig for any and all new innovations like this in Europe for as long as we are in debt to the overlords. Greece, Spain or Italy would riot if anything like this was proposed for them, we will bitch and moan but accept it with ass cheeks spread while Germany and France accept Google, Facebook, Paypal and all others based here with open arms.

    I care a lot more about censorship being imposed on a free media than paying for our own mistakes. I would never protest about the economy, because frankly, we got everything we deserved on that front. I would go out and protest, induce roadblocks, harrass politicians, the works, if censorship was imposed. This is one of the few things I actually would stand for, and I will guarantee you that I am not the only one who would.

    If you wish to make sweeping generalizations about the integrity of this nation, go, go to your local pub, be with similarly small minded people. If you want to actually do something, bloody well prepare to do something.

    As of now, I drafted an email to three local TDs and sent another to Sean Sherlock, and I'll be phoning Sherlock daily if I don't get a response to my email. What have you done? Moaned a bit? Grow up and do something.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,921 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    dillo2k10 wrote: »
    I assume the legislation would only allow them to block websites that contain copy righted material.
    If my understanding is correct sites could be blocked even if they consistently remove copyright material in a timely manner. Perhaps they could be blocked even if accused of having such material, why wait on conclusive proof ?
    Would it not also be possible to use proxys to get around the block too?
    tor


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    I just strolled over to an open torrent site.
    One dvd rip file has 14,000+ seeding and 5,000+ leeching :eek:

    ... 1 site. 19,000+ people sharing it. Not to mention the users who downloaded without sharing back. Not to mention the other sites. Wow. That is something.


Advertisement