An open letter from Boards.ie to Minister Sean Sherlock

dillo2k10

I want to send a letter to Sean Sherlock.

Does anyone know if there is a company in Ireland that offer a service that would only allow Mr Sherlock himself to sign for the item upon delivery.

AlmightyCushion

dillo2k10 wrote: »

I want to send a letter to Sean Sherlock.

Does anyone know if there is a company in Ireland that offer a service that would only allow Mr Sherlock himself to sign for the item upon delivery.

Registered letter via an post.

dillo2k10

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Registered letter via an post.

But anyone could sign for it once it arrives at the correct address.

dolallyoh

KyussBishop wrote: »

Maybe I shouldn't be surprised, idk I don't follow Irish politics or papers much, but that's a shamefully one sided, stenographical article and should not have been printed without critical reply.

Do the Irish Times accept (and actually put up) articles from outside submitters, or only stuff hidden away in the 'letters' section?

Anyone with the writing talents and knowledge of the subject, would do well to spend the time writing up articles to submit to various papers; can't let there be a completely one-sided picture of things in the papers/media.

EDIT: While on the topic, are there any newspapers or whatnot in Ireland that are actually good? What sources are there with actual decent journalism in 'the media'?

The Times

dolallyoh

dillo2k10 wrote: »

I want to send a letter to Sean Sherlock.

Does anyone know if there is a company in Ireland that offer a service that would only allow Mr Sherlock himself to sign for the item upon delivery.

Hope its not another poor trotter...

Edg3

Arent things like this meant to be put to the people? Or is that just when they want us to put them in power.

I think I worded what I said badly, stupid tired brain.

What I mean is, I remember hearing on the news all about the SOPA stuff in the US and that websites shut down to protest it, I havent heard any of this on RTE.
I dont read the papers so didnt realize it'd been put in there. I've written him via email and post about this myself.
I'd like to think I keep up to date with this kinda thing, but I heard nothing about it til I came back to boards after a while of being away. It seems that it, in some senses, slipped under the radar while everyone was fixed on SOPA. Correct me if I'm wrong of course, I just never heard a word uttered of it til i logged onto boards and seen the pop up!

denballs

I HAVE THE SOLUTION!

after weeks of thought and complex equations ive finally got it...


its so simple

we kill them all:D

jay-me

denballs wrote: »

I HAVE THE SOLUTION!

after weeks of thought and complex equations ive finally got it...


its so simple

we kill them all:D

An almost foolproof plan.. But you have forgotten one simple step that must be undertaken before you end them!

BLAST THEM WITH PISS!!!!

nesf

Ok guys, can we clean up the tone of this please. This isn't AH.

bedrock#1

Great turn out for yesterdays protest....

The keyboard warriors really stuck it to the man.....

Pathetic country all together - we deserve this and everything else that's been done to us over the last number of years because we are the softest most apathetic country on the planet

For shame

gavmcg92

that's a lot of thanks on the OP!

freeze4real

bedrock#1 wrote: »

Great turn out for yesterdays protest....

The keyboard warriors really stuck it to the man.....

Pathetic country all together - we deserve this and everything else that's been done to us over the last number of years because we are the softest most apathetic country on the planet

For shame

I guess the turnout was bad.

briany

bedrock#1 wrote: »

Great turn out for yesterdays protest....

The keyboard warriors really stuck it to the man.....

Pathetic country all together - we deserve this and everything else that's been done to us over the last number of years because we are the softest most apathetic country on the planet

For shame

/Sarcasm

DeVore

Organising takes time... That's why they are rushing through.

I had a 90 minute conversation with Sherlock from Malta (at my own expense cos it was on my mobile) and I put a lot of points too him,most of which he accepted but then he ended by saying he was going to sign it anyway. Head, Table etc. I got him to accept that we'd have the debate on this... Thinking that the opposition could make the points... They did and he ignored them too.

There's still a lot of "politicking" going on behind the scenes but this is one seriously ****ed up democracy we have.

In real terms if they are pushing the EU treaty through while saying that referendums are "undemocratic" then we are through the looking glass and I weep for our children.

I dunno if the SOPA thing would even register on the scale so I worry that they simply won't care any more how much they're hated for their treason.

kraggy

Very basic question here.

What's he about to sign? A Bill, is it? If so, does that make the proposal an actual law or is there another step in the process?

Will it go to a Dail vote or can a minister enact legislation on his own without a vote?

DeVore

His signature makes it law, no vote needed.

What "debate" we had was
1) laughable
2) the first in the history of the state on such a thing.

Ridiculous powers that needs reform...

kraggy

DeVore wrote: »

His signature makes it law, no vote needed.

What "debate" we had was
1) laughable
2) the first in the history of the state on such a thing.

Ridiculous powers that needs reform...

That's absolutely scandalous.

So the law is now in place or has he to sign it yet?

As a matter of interest, new laws in general, when do they need to be put to vote in the Dail and when don't they?

Thanks.

DavidCollins

kraggy, to answer your question, he's signing a Statuory Instrument.

You see, only the Oireachtas is meant to be able to make laws, and what they tend to pass are Acts of the Oireachtas which are referred to as Primary Legislation. However, since you can't expect a Dáil vote on every single tiny change of law, we have what's called Secondary Legislation which can be changed much quicker. This Secondary Legislation is meant to gain it's power from Primary Legislation, and it should only act within the scope of Primary Legislation. It's never meant to ammend the Primary Legislation or create new powers that weren't envisaged by the Primary Legislation.

As you may have figured, a Statuory Instrument is Secondary Legislation, and given what I've said above you'd think that what Sherlock's SI is doing should not be allowed as it both ammends Primary Legislation and gives new powers. Indeed, in the past the courts have declared similar SI as being unconstitutional such as in the Leontjava case. At the same time I've heard that using such Ministerial Orders has been used in the past to sneak law into practice.

Short answer: What Sherlock is signing isn't the highest piece of law, and is of debatable legal standing, but it will be legally binding unless a court specifically declares it as unconstitutional.





On a separate note, I've reproduced more of my mail transcripts with Bruton. As always, please don't verbatim copy them and send them to exactly the same person, I'm still surprised that that happened the last time I did this.

Jan 31

David,

There is no foundation for the fears you express. The case law defining the scope of such injunctions has been set in the so called "Scarlet Case". The Courts cannot deny the principles set out in that judgement.

Kind regards,

Richard Bruton T.D.

Jan 31

To Richard Bruton,

The Irish courts are under no obligation to follow any judgements made in European courts. We live in a dualist state where European case judgements are binding on us intentionally but not nationally. This was firmly established in the Kavanagh v The Governor of Mountjoy Prison case and as such, SABAM vs Scarlet has no authority in Irish law.

Even if the case did have authority, it would only relate to the blocking of website. It would not restrict injunctions being launched against countless other job-generating companies of the Irish tech sector, be they indigenous or multinationals brought here by the IDA. More tellingly, there is no way for a given tech company to be able to predict or know in advance how to avoid receiving such an injunction.

Regards,
David

Feb 3

To Richard Bruton,

While I am extremly happy to see an Irish Minister personally respond to an Irish Citizen as myself over an issue of great importance to the Irish state, I'm dismayed that you have not responded to my email which mentioned that Irish courts were not bound by the "Scarlet Case" and as such there are no restrictions upon the injunctions courts of if the Stautory Instrument copyright that's propsed is signed by you and takes effect.

Regards,

On a final note, I went to the protest on my way home from something. It was a little extremist for my taste, and apparently Socialist and Anarchist leaflets were being handed out. I really wish we could have made a more reasonable, presentable display, to show them that we were regular people protesting a serious issue. It would have made us a lot harder to ignore.

Lord TSC

It was a little extremist for my taste, and apparently Socialist and Anarchist leaflets were being handed out.

This is why I hate when "youth" go out to protest; they always get hijacked.

Besides, surely what we need is for the likes of Google and the other net-based companies to come out strongly against this, threathening to pull out of Ireland if it goes through? Am I not right in saying that in America, it wasn't protests which led to the end of SOPA but the threats from big companies who could cost the country millions in terms of revenue and jobs?

If people really want to do something, surely it's the multinational's support they should be seeking; in this country, at this time, jobs are the only threat we can use.

jay-me

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

This is why I hate when "youth" go out to protest; they always get hijacked.

Besides, surely what we need is for the likes of Google and the other net-based companies to come out strongly against this, threathening to pull out of Ireland if it goes through? Am I not right in saying that in America, it wasn't protests which led to the end of SOPA but the threats from big companies who could cost the country millions in terms of revenue and jobs?

If people really want to do something, surely it's the multinational's support they should be seeking; in this country, at this time, jobs are the only threat we can use.

TBH I think the SOPA thing was just a scape goat for this monstrosity.. To let the people think they had a say and actually won! Unfortunately ACTA has been signed by America already and the big companies don't seem perturbed by it.

FreudianSlippers

DeVore wrote: »

In real terms if they are pushing the EU treaty through while saying that referendums are "undemocratic" then we are through the looking glass and I weep for our children.

In fairness, talk of a referendum on the issue is nonsense. Firstly, there is no issue of constitutional amendment. Secondly, this is not a bill but rather a statutory instrument; even if it were a bill, there has never been an occasion on which an "ordinary" referendum was held.

The real question is twofold: 1) is this ultra vires the Minister's power? My belief is that it is as it is not required by Irish or EU law; 2) Is it effective? The answer to this is also no, as a result of SABAM and EMI v UPC, the implementation of the previous EMI v Eircom decision is invalid as it has effectively been ruled otherwise in SABAM and UPC.

Spacedog

The idea that the Scarlet Judgement prevents judges from censoring the internet is laughable.

Today in Belgium, the 2 largest ISPs here Belgacom and Telenet both block the DNS entries for the pirate bay. on entering the URL into your browser you are greeted with a simple HTML page explaining the judgement.

this is bypassed simply by re-setting ones DNS server to google or open DNS or using one of many firefox plugins.

I agree with Sherlock that no-one's going to shut down boards.ie, youtube, google or face book. Because these sites will fall in line and self censor rather than do time or pay legal expenses for preserving their right to free speech, I'd be more concerned with the likes of wikileaks, or the website of the guy who discovered Carrier IQ mobile phone spyware, getting sued on the grounds of copyright with the motive of suppressing the truth from the public. etc.

I can't figure out if Sherlock is evil or stupid at this point.

If i could ask him one question it would be:
What will it take for you to not sign the SI?

...because we've tried everything short of storming the gates of the Dail.

Spacedog

jay-me wrote: »

TBH I think the SOPA thing was just a scape goat for this monstrosity.. To let the people think they had a say and actually won! Unfortunately ACTA has been signed by America already and the big companies don't seem perturbed by it.

signed but not yet ratified. ACTA still needs the sigs of MEPs.

FreudianSlippers

Spacedog wrote: »

The idea that the Scarlet Judgement prevents judges from censoring the internet is laughable.

Have you read SABAM? I would disagree with this wholeheartedly. It prevents ISPs from having to implement further measures to filter.

EU law precludes the imposition of an injunction by a national court which requires an internet service provider to install a filtering system with a view to preventing the illegal downloading of files
Such an injunction does not comply with the prohibition on imposing a general monitoring obligation on such a provider, or with the requirement to strike a fair balance between, on the one hand, the right to intellectual property, and, on the other, the freedom to conduct business, the right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information

DavidCollins

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Have you read SABAM? I would disagree with this wholeheartedly. It prevents ISPs from having to implement further measures to filter.

European Courts are not binding on Irish courts. This was established when the European Courts determined that a prosecution in the Special Criminal Court was invalid and Irish Courts kept using those courts anyway (Kavanagh case).

FreudianSlippers

DavidCollins wrote: »

European Courts are not binding on Irish courts. This was established when the European Courts determined that a prosecution in the Special Criminal Court was invalid and Irish Courts kept using those courts anyway (Kavanagh case).

Kavanagh v Ireland? That was a UN Human Rights Committee matter and they found that Ireland had not proven that the offence was within Art 26 to be tried in the SCC. That has since been changed by SI.

ECJ decisions are binding on Irish Courts. Whoever told you otherwise is incorrect.


EDIT: Maybe you're thinking of the European Court of Human Rights whose decisions are non-binding. Still, Kavanagh was neither ECJ or ECtHR

DavidCollins

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Kavanagh v Ireland? That was a UN Human Rights Committee matter and they found that Ireland had not proven that the offence was within Art 26 to be tried in the SCC. That has since been changed by SI.

ECJ decisions are binding on Irish Courts. Whoever told you otherwise is incorrect.

ECJ decisions are binding on Irish Courts internationally. However, nationally they are only binding when they've been incorporated into an Act of the Oireachtas. This makes Ireland a Dualist state, unlike some other European countries where ECJ deciisons would be binding.

FreudianSlippers

DavidCollins wrote: »

ECJ decisions are binding on Irish Courts internationally. However, nationally they are only binding when they've been incorporated into an Act of the Oireachtas. This makes Ireland a Dualist state, unlike some other European countries where ECJ deciisons would be binding.

You're missing the point. Ireland cannot be liable for failing to implement the measures that this SI proposes because it is unlawful under EU law for an ISP to be or­dered to implement blocking and filtering technology. Where there is inconsistency between Irish and EU jurisprudence, the EU law and jurisprudence takes precedence over Irish law.

Spacedog

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Have you read SABAM? I would disagree with this wholeheartedly. It prevents ISPs from having to implement further measures to filter.

I'm just telling you what's happening in reality of where the Scarlet Judgement was passed. Like it or not, The piratebay hosts no copyrighted content (unlike youtube) it is 100% within the law in the jurisdiction it is hosted in, and raids/prosecution of it's founders were illegal and motivated by pressures from the US' international trade diplomats under lobbying pressure from the established recording and film distribution industry there.

Scarlet was presented by Sherlock as a safeguard, that Irish judges would consider in order to protect sites from being blocked. considering that Scarlet is not adhered to in practice in it's country of origin is an indication that the alternative wording put forward by the technical group would safeguard this intent.

FreudianSlippers

Spacedog wrote: »

I'm just telling you what's happening in reality of where the Scarlet Judgement was passed. Like it or not, The piratebay hosts no copyrighted content (unlike youtube) it is 100% within the law in the jurisdiction it is hosted in, and raids/prosecution of it's founders were illegal and motivated by pressures from the US' international trade diplomats under lobbying pressure from the established recording and film distribution industry there.

Scarlet was presented by Sherlock as a safeguard, that Irish judges would consider in order to protect sites from being blocked. considering that Scarlet is not adhered to in practice in it's country of origin is an indication that the alternative wording put forward by the technical group would safeguard this intent.

You're muddying the waters now. ISPs cannot be forced to implement these measures; there is nothing stopping them from doing so voluntarily.

Thepiratebay does not need to host material to be in breach (see earlier posts of mine considering linking only sites, being also illegal). Scarlet Extended is adhered to in Belgium.

What do you mean Scarlet was presented by Sherlock as a safeguard? Sherlock seems to be ignoring Scarlet entirely; he says this is implementing EMI v Eircom, now irrelevant due to EMI v UPC and Scarlet Extended (SABAM). ISPs cannot be forced to implement these measures - it renders the SI completely moot as the copyright holders cannot now get the measures they want. The danger of the SI is it potentially allows further measures to be taken which we haven't anticipated.