An open letter from Boards.ie to Minister Sean Sherlock

nyarlothothep

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

I am.

I may be bankrupt soon, but I am.

Why don't you?

well that's commendable, what are you going to do? I on the other hand don't possess the requisite characteristics to affect any change in the world, I can observe, discuss and write about it but that's about it.

Citizen_Kane

nyarlothothep wrote: »

well that's commendable, what are you going to do? I on the other hand don't possess the requisite characteristics to affect any change in the world, I can observe, discuss and write about it but that's about it.

PM me and I will link you to what I am doing.

There is plenty that everyone can do. Suggestions:

• Examine the food you buy. Buy fresh, buy local, buy seasonal.
• Understand supply chains and the effect they have on the exploitation of unbalanced markets.
• Grow a vegetable garden.
• Pay attention to and talk about food security.
• Stop buying things you don't need.
• Don't be afraid to spoil the 'craic' by talking about real things.
• Stop indulging in the orgy of party politics.
• Turn off your television.
• Use your tech cleverly - stop buying the latest and greatest.
• Stop being afraid.
• Continue being a #Iamakeyboardwarrior

Citizen_Kane

Buttimer:

I’m a democrat. I’m prepared to engage with people who engage with me. I had a website, I was on Bebo long before they became fashionable. I don’t want to see online rights curbed.

OMG ---- Bebo!!!!!!!!!!

Link to article here.

FreudianSlippers

So basically Minister Sherlock is like this:

Citizen_Kane

Just in from the Irish courts:

A JUDGE yesterday ordered a website to be shut down and said lawmakers should think about making it illegal to post "patently untrue" allegations about people on the internet.

Link to article here.

Website in question?

www.rate-your-solicitor.com

FreudianSlippers

Defamation; not copyright.

Citizen_Kane

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Defamation; not copyright.

Yes - but does illustrate the sweeping powers that Sherlock is giving the courts.

They wouldn't shut down a newspaper for defamation - they would seek civil action against the editor.

Next to go under this strategy will be:

http://www.ratemyteachers.com/

I can post defamatory items on Facebook, or Boards.

I could call for mass action and Boards could be shut down for incitement to revolt.

It's not just about copyright, it's about the court's sweeping power to control the internet.

dahamsta

It's pertinent imho.

I've been following that site since a solicitor complained to me about comments about them; comments that were entirely accurate imho. That said, some of Gill's complaints are about another solicitor I've dealt with, and they come across as unreasonable. Gill is, uh, something I can't say for fear of bring accused of defamation, but the judge has got two chances of shutting the website down, slim and none. If it goes down, it'll go straight back up again at another host; if the domain is killed, it'll go back up on another knee.

Another judge with zero technical knowledge and not enough brains to consult someone with some.

oscarBravo

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

I can post defamatory items on Facebook, or Boards.

...and Boards will take them down, which goes some way to explaining why Boards is still up and running.

FreudianSlippers

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

Yes - but does illustrate the sweeping powers that Sherlock is giving the courts.

They wouldn't shut down a newspaper for defamation - they would seek civil action against the editor.

The SI is specifically about Copyright. It has no impact on defamation proceedings.

Next to go under this strategy will be:

http://www.ratemyteachers.com/

That is a US website and not subject to Irish legislation.

I can post defamatory items on Facebook, or Boards.

You can, but you and/or Facebook and/or Boards can also be sued for defamation.

It's not just about copyright, it's about the court's sweeping power to control the internet.

Actually this doesn't give the courts much power; it really gives the copyright holder more power.

Citizen_Kane

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and Boards will take them down, which goes some way to explaining why Boards is still up and running.

As you ethically should. Thank you.

The issue is however cultural (which our leaders fail to recognise).

Stopping defamation by censorship is as pointless as stopping 'piracy' by censorship. A mature society will accept these inevitabilities, just like we accept blatant mistruth and farce in our advertising.

I am speculating that any reasonable reader of rate-my-solicitor would be able to spot once-off defamation. Sustained defamation of a solicitor from multiple sources would point to collusion or that the solicitor has a serious PR problem.

In any case, your regular f**ktard troll is usually easily identifiable by forensic analysis and has left a breadcrumb visible from space back to their identity.

Citizen_Kane

Apologies - I am not trying to divert from the topic at hand. I just feel that the principal is relevant.

NotSoTall

just wondering, but what happens now? is that it, is the law in place? or does it have to be ratified in some way?

wiseguy

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and Boards will take them down, which goes some way to explaining why Boards is still up and running.

What happens if boards get sued for having the facility for such things to be posted, after all a defamation comment is nothing more than a series of 0s and 1s at the technical level.

dahamsta

That's probably their next step, prevent discussion of their crap artists entirely.

Citizen_Kane

wiseguy wrote: »

What happens if boards get sued for having the facility for such things to be posted, after all a defamation comment is nothing more than a series of 0s and 1s at the technical level.

I think the mods are trying to keep us on topic, but yes you are right. I don't think that kind of logic is imminent yet.

Respect

wiseguy

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

I think the mods are trying to keep us on topic, but yes you are right. I don't think that kind of logic is imminent yet.

Respect

Would you put it past the music/movie industry?

look what they are up to now wanting sites to prove that they are not guilty, by assuming guilt first not innocence as should be the case.

Citizen_Kane

Wouldn't put anything past them, but we are straying into defamation territory, not copyright and the SI.

I may start a new thread later, but have been putting off work for hours now:)

dil999

I signed the petition, and will email out to as many as possible. I also submitted a very polite and considered note to him via his website

I didn't read all the posts, so if this has been noted before then apologies, but an early poster was laughing at the fact that his website was showing up the submitters ip address. The funny thing is its not correct. It showed me up with 81.17.241.31 when in fact i have a fixed ip address starting in 95. Its ironic because i mentioned Gallant Macmillan, the UK solicitors who in 2010 sent round requests for up to £350 compensation to 2000 users, alleging illegal downloading. based on IP address info that was later found to be flawed.

I submitted a quick note to him after, outlining the point

johnnydenims

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

PM me and I will link you to what I am doing.


There is plenty that everyone can do. Suggestions:

• Examine the food you buy. Buy fresh, buy local, buy seasonal.
• Understand supply chains and the effect they have on the exploitation of unbalanced markets.
• Grow a vegetable garden.
• Pay attention to and talk about food security.
• Stop buying things you don't need.
• Don't be afraid to spoil the 'craic' by talking about real things.
• Stop indulging in the orgy of party politics.
• Turn off your television.
• Use your tech cleverly - stop buying the latest and greatest.
• Stop being afraid.
• Continue being a #Iamakeyboardwarrior

lots of people are doing this but its still not changing the world i agree with what your saying but not enough people seem to be listening(80,000 people signed sopa petition 3,000,000 internet users in ireland) where do we go from here? I dont know . I do know it will be a shame if we cant voice our opinions on websites like and including boards.ie for fear of censorship.

Citizen_Kane

johnnydenims wrote: »

lots of people are doing this but its still not changing the world i agree with what your saying but not enough people seem to be listening(80,000 people signed sopa petition 3,000,000 internet users in ireland) where do we go from here? I dont know . I do know it will be a shame if we cant voice our opinions on websites like and including boards.ie for fear of censorship.

Bang on your drum louder and prepare yourself for a rough ride then. You can't expect anything from anyone - only yourself.

There is a digital rights workshop and a protest march in Dublin on Saturday. I am in Limerick, so PM if you are also in the area and need a lift there.

If you can't get there, make an appointment with your local TD's on Sat to voice your disapproval.

If you haven't already, have a look at http://stopsopaireland.com/

infowars.com

what time and where does that march start at m8?

infowars.com

http://www.infowars.com/hawaii-lawmaker-acknowledges-defeat-on-bill-to-monitor-all-web-users/

Citizen_Kane

infowars.com wrote: »

what time and where does that march start at m8?

The Protest
The Workshop

johnnydenims

Citizen_Kane wrote: »

Bang on your drum louder and prepare yourself for a rough ride then. You can't expect anything from anyone - only yourself.

There is a digital rights workshop and a protest march in Dublin on Saturday. I am in Limerick, so PM if you are also in the area and need a lift there.

If you can't get there, make an appointment with your local TD's on Sat to voice your disapproval.

If you haven't already, have a look at http://stopsopaireland.com/

tried to pm you but couldnt

[-0-]

I received these replies recently.

Dear [-0-],

Many thanks for your email in relation to ACTA.

I was involved in the debate on ACTA. I am fully aware of the importance of the digital economy to Ireland, however, I believe there are a number of misunderstandings in relation the impact ACTA will have on it.

ACTA will not change EU law. It is about enforcing the existing rules and giving the holders of intellectual property rights the tools to pursue their right should they be confronted with large-scale counterfeits. Everybody who holds an intellectual property (IP) right, from the wine producer to the owner of entertainment software, will be able to count on common rules regarding the way they can complain with the authorities and how a complaint is dealt with. However, ACTA does not push the balance of rights towards IP right-holders. It fully respects free Internet and safeguards the role of service providers, as well as of the European system of copyright exceptions. The European regime of conditional exemption of liability for Internet operators, but also the European exceptions like private or educational use, will remain valid and unchanged. Respect for fundamental rights such as, privacy, freedom of expression and data protection is enshrined as a basic principle of the agreement and provisions in this regard are clearly stated in the text.

There also seems to be a misunderstanding in relation to how the ACTA agreement was negotiated. The text of ACTA is publicly available to all. The negotiations were not different from negotiations on any other international agreement. It is a fact that such agreements are not negotiated in public, but with the Lisbon Agreement and the revised Framework Agreement there are clear rules on how the Parliament should be informed of such trade negotiations. These have been followed. The European Commissioner for Trade (Karl De Gucht) participated in three Parliament debates, and replied to several written and oral questions, as well to two Resolutions and one Declaration of the Parliament, whilst Commission services have provided several dedicated briefings to MEPs during the negotiations.

In relation to how ACTA may affect access to affordable medicines in the developing world, there are no provisions in ACTA that could directly or indirectly affect the trade in generic medicines or global public health. The Commission has consulted on a number of occasions in the course of the last two years with public health stake-holders and NGOs, as well as with companies and associations producing generics and even with representatives of countries like Brazil and India, to ensure that ACTA would not impact on the access to affordable medicines for developing countries.

I hope this reply is of assistance to you.

Regards,

Jim Higgins MEP and Quaestor
European Parliament

Dear [-0-],

Many thanks for your email concerning the ACTA agreement. This is an issue that Paul Murphy MEP and the Socialist Party feels very strongly about. We completely oppose the ACTA agreement and have been actively campaigning against it in the European Parliament. Paul Murphy MEP has also been calling for the debate about the agreement to be held in a public and transparent manner and not behind closed doors as it has been up to now.

We share your concern that the agreement infringes on the principles of freedom of speech on the internet. We believe that states should not have the power to censor and/or block access to the internet. This could be used in the future to limit the basic democratic rights to freedom of expression and association.

As well as infringing on the rights of internet users the ACTA agreement will also make it more difficult for states to supply generic drugs which could put affordable medicines beyond the reach of the world's most poor. The ACTA agreement could also be used to block access to seeds which would cause hardship to the world's poorest farmers. It is clear that ACTA serves the interest of big business and runs counter to the interests of the world's poor and to democratic rights.

For ACTA to be passed it must be approved by the European Parliament. It will therefore be discussed in different parliamentary committees before being put to a vote in a plenary session later in the year. Paul Murphy MEP will be voting against it at all stages as it goes through the European Parliament.

Paul Murphy MEP is a member of the International Trade committee (INTA) of the European Parliament. This committee is the main Parliamentary committee concerning the ACTA agreement. The agreement has been discussed in the committee on various occasions while the talks on the deal were ongoing. ACTA will be discussed and voted on again in the International Trade Committee in the coming months, the dates of these meetings have not yet been confirmed however we expect it to be out of committee stage and be put to vote in a plenary session this Summer. Paul Murphy will of course use these debates in the committee to continue to oppose ACTA and to express your concerns. We will keep our website updated with the progress of these discussions (www.paulmurphymep.eu).

ACTA was discussed in the Development Committee (DEVE) last week, Paul Murphy MEP is not a member of the Development committee but he has discussed the matter with colleagues of from the United Left (GUE/NGL) parliamentary group that sit on that committee and raised your concerns with them. There is a consensus of opposition to ACTA in the GUE/NGL group.

I hope this email helped to clarify Paul Murphy's and the Socialist Party's position on ACTA. Paul Murphy intends to write a more detailed article for his website in the coming weeks on this matter so please feel free to check his site for that. If you have any further comments or would like to discuss ACTA or other issues further please feel free to keep in touch.

Kind Regards,

Finghín Kelly

briany

The problem with trying to censor internet sites is that some of the people behind what you're trying to censor will see it as a flat out challenge and something to be overcome. Donnelly has it dead right in stating that it merely amuses the infringers. Every block that gets put in place puts millions of users to work on a mission to find a way around it and, in the process, finding out about some sort of technology that allows them to not only get around the block but also maybe protect their privacy in a VPN or get around geo blocking restrictions so they're creating ever more savvy users.

Wibbs

Yep, the very design of the web sees a break in transmission as a fault and tries to route around it. This goes for censorship too. Then you have the vast army of tech savvy folks who will exploit that and have the brains and tools to do it. So yes the infringers will bypass it and it doesn't require much technical nous for most of the rest of us if we decide to do so.

However behind much of the internet are the people trying to build something good and free with the caveats of decency and honesty and free sharing of non copyright material, opinions and information. They're the ones who will suffer from guff like this.

It's not far off gun law in the US in many ways(if one sets aside ones own personal morality about them). Honest people who enjoy shooting will be ever more restricted by legislation purporting to restrict the criminals, but the criminals will always have guns. Once you set up a system for all at first, restricting said system tends to only affect the law abiding. The gun lobby over there talks about their right to keep and bear arms, we're talking about the right to keep and bear free information and debate.

Sadly I can see this bit of risible, badly thought out and dare I say it externally influenced legislation going through. And it'll be a sad day when it does. Not at first. It'll be subtle at first. Big sites will think twice as they've likely had experience of ambulance chasers under current laws and may feel the tall poppy syndrome may be in play. Small sites will crap themselves at even a hint of being taken to task for the slightest grey area.

KyussBishop

briany wrote: »

The problem with trying to censor internet sites is that some of the people behind what you're trying to censor will see it as a flat out challenge and something to be overcome. Donnelly has it dead right in stating that it merely amuses the infringers. Every block that gets put in place puts millions of users to work on a mission to find a way around it and, in the process, finding out about some sort of technology that allows them to not only get around the block but also maybe protect their privacy in a VPN or get around geo blocking restrictions so they're creating ever more savvy users.

Indeed. Back when attempts were made to block WikiLeaks by having companies revoke their DNS etc., I spent time working on a Firefox plugin specifically for undoing that (not unlike MafiaaFIRE; same concept but specific to WikiLeaks).

Project never was finished, as was redundant after thousands of alternative mirrors popped up for WikiLeaks, but seriously considering reviving it and plugging a crapload of proxy services into it, and perhaps linking it up with Tor, to undo any of this website blocking bullshít.
Hell if could squeeze decent donations or money out of such a project, could setup a network of VPN's and have a proxy network specifically for it.

Would love to see them try and block Tor (though the cynic in me says that stuff will follow before too long). Prove it's impractical, go some way to showing how pointless it is, and that you're only left with all the negatives of such laws, without having any positive effects.

thebman

They only want Tor for regions they want to revolt TBH.

Not for use at home :P

"Sure you don't need it at home, you have freedom!"*

* Terms and Conditions apply.