An open letter from Boards.ie to Minister Sean Sherlock

expectationlost

DavidCollins wrote: »

Not somebody in the limelight if that's what you mean. But everybody is somebody!

Got a reply:



Okay, first paragraph I disagree with. I'm pretty sure SI's aren't that flexible but I'll need to cement my points with quotes before I respond (probably from the judges in the cases I cited).
It occurs to me I forgot to make the point about Sabam not being binding in Ireland, or at least only acting as a guidance. As such, he brings up the Sabam case again asking me to research it, along with some EU Charters. Of course, he's not saying which specific areas I should pay attention to.

As for the Copyright Review Committee, whoa, since when were they involved in this? Who are they?
I looked some stuff up and found this:
http://www.djei.ie/press/2012/20120131c.htm . Incidentally, the link is useful for understanding Sherlock's stance on this. He talk about how Ireland could face expenses if their copyright system is not changed (possibly referring to Ireland being sued by the Music companies), and actually mentions Boards.ie and how he believes it will not receive an injunction (because of the "hosting exemption") .
With regards to the Committee, it was set up on 9th May, 2011 and will be producing a paper shortly.
I'm confused. Is it just going to support his point? Even if it does a huge problem with this legislation is with how it's implemented. So many other things too...

It's going to take me a while to get a response to this one, and I've got other things to do that's going to delay the response further.
I still can't shake the feeling I've been brushed off, but still need to provide a reasoned response.

well other people wrote considered emails to bruton and didn't get a proper reply.

now that you have his attention ask him for the submissions to the SI copyright held last summer, got 50 submission they say but never published them, it is policy to do so * http://www.lexferenda.com/01022012/copyrightdebateinireland/

SniperPaddy

Amazing the way true democracy gets clouded.
Regarding the protests, Sean Sherlock was able to hide behind quotes of teenagers leaving voice mails swearing at him.

:mad:

DavidCollins

expectationlost wrote: »

well other people wrote considered emails to bruton and didn't get a proper reply.

now that you have his attention ask him for the submissions to the SI copyright held last summer, got 50 submission they say but never published them, it is policy to do so * http://www.lexferenda.com/01022012/copyrightdebateinireland/

If Bruton replies to my last email, I'll include that information in the reply.

I'm thinking a website to bring together all this information and provide a concise, considered argument against the legislation would be a good idea. Not sure what to call it though, maybe "Keyboard Warrior", but that sounds a bit activist.

FreudianSlippers

DavidCollins wrote: »

It occurs to me I forgot to make the point about Sabam not being binding in Ireland, or at least only acting as a guidance. As such, he brings up the Sabam case again asking me to research it, along with some EU Charters. Of course, he's not saying which specific areas I should pay attention to.

What's your basis for stating that SABAM is not binding in Ireland? Just wondering if you have a legal background?

DeVore

SniperPaddy wrote: »

Amazing the way true democracy gets clouded.
Regarding the protests, Sean Sherlock was able to hide behind quotes of teenagers leaving voice mails swearing at him.

:mad:

In the old media he was protected and shielded that way... But everyone is beginning to see through that and see that online is where the discussion is happening and that the story is very different.

I've never been more proud of boards and the people here from users through admins, mods to CMODS.

nesf

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a subjective standard, though. I don't use Dropbox for copyright infringement, but I've heard that others do. If someone convinces a judge that it's "largely" used for copyright infringement, I've lost a useful tool (and I'll probably have to jump through hoops and break my routers' and servers' configurations in a futile attempt to block it).

What's interesting to me in this is that is there an invasion of privacy looking into non-public Dropbox folders in this way? Secondly, what's stopping people having an encrypted shared folder in Dropbox? Will Dropbox be required to break the encryption their users set or forbid encryption altogether? The latter would render the tool useless for many legitimate purposes.

A real can of worms.

lmimmfn

oscarBravo wrote: »

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

yeah but thats just BS because there should be freedom of speech rather than overseers monitoring that noone says anything out of line.

If theres some defamatory comment on some guy in a discussion there will be both sides to argue for/against unless its completely obvious someone did something wrong and hasnt a leg to stand on.

Im not dissing boards( i know this is an issue from the past and should never have been ), im saying i can post any auld $h*t about anyone i want on twitter and it shouldnt be eligible for court action as its MY opinion, no more than talking to someone in the pub.

FreudianSlippers

lmimmfn wrote: »

oscarBravo wrote: »

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

yeah but thats just BS because there should be freedom of speech rather than overseers monitoring that noone says anything out of line.

If theres some defamatory comment on some guy in a discussion there will be both sides to argue for/against unless its completely obvious someone did something wrong and hasnt a leg to stand on.

Im not dissing boards( i know this is an issue from the past and should never have been ), im saying i can post any auld $h*t about anyone i want on twitter and it shouldnt be eligible for court action as its MY opinion, no more than talking to someone in the pub.

If a comment is defamatory then by its very definition it is not true. The making of that untrue comment may not be illegal under certain circumstances; however my understanding of boards policy in this regard is effectively to protect the users from further defamation, themselves from unnecessary legal action and the users from exposing themselves to legal action

Defamation law itself is a stifling of freedom of speech to protect other rights. No rights are absolute and are constantly balanced against other rights.

DavidCollins

New article in The Irish Times: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0210/1224311564735.html Very nice to see.

FreudianSlippers: I'm studying a law Diploma in the King's Inns. Our Constitutional Law lecturer was fairly clear about how Ireland is a dualist state.

By the way, in terms of getting replies from your politicians, try CCing your emails to your newspaper/radio/news source of choice. It makes you harder to ignore and raises our profile with the media to boot.

Hotblack Desiato

Yeah, great article in the IT. A comment on it has a link to http://www.unmultimedia.org/radio/english/2012/02/ireland-to-push-for-internet-freedom-in-2012/

UNmultimedia.org wrote:

Ireland says it intends to prioritise internet freedom as the new Chair of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe or OSCE.

Speaking at a Security Council meeting on Thursday, Ireland’s Deputy Prime Minister said the threat to freedom of expression online is ever-present and growing.

Hey, left hand, go tell right hand what you're doing :rolleyes:

skelliser

whats the latest news on this?

has Sherlock gone quiet in the hope that this will blow over and then sign it on the sly?

DeVore

There seems to be complete blackout about it.

It seems like it is either stuck in limbo while they internally decide if they want to push on, or they are waiting for something else to distract people... Or a particularly bad news day that they can bury it in.

If they think we're going to let this lie, they're wrong. But then, we're keyboard warriors and vandals, right?

FreudianSlippers

DavidCollins wrote: »

New article in The Irish Times: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0210/1224311564735.html Very nice to see.

FreudianSlippers: I'm studying a law Diploma in the King's Inns. Our Constitutional Law lecturer was fairly clear about how Ireland is a dualist state.

By the way, in terms of getting replies from your politicians, try CCing your emails to your newspaper/radio/news source of choice. It makes you harder to ignore and raises our profile with the media to boot.

I'm fairly sure that the person lecturing you did not say that the ECJ is not binding on Ireland.


EDIT: I'm sorry, I was posting on my phone and was overly abrupt here. ECJ decisions are binding on both the Member States and its citizens through two principles: Direct Effect (see Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse 26/62 [1963] ECR 1) and Supremacy (see Costa v ENEL 6/64 [1964] ECR 585). While you are correct that there is a duality in place, this only exists for principles not covered by the aforementioned (indirect effect or incidental effect or... where the case may be and to use a misnomer, "horizontal effect"). You will be facing up to this in dip2 and likely become intimately familiar with Craig and de Burca!

Spacedog

Reading Sherlock priorities list on his home page, i see he included deploying broadband in rural areas and in his constituency. I wonder how alienating every ISP in Ireland helps this, as well as exposing ISPs to frivolous litigation expenses, money that could be better spent on rural data infrastructure investments.

Spacedog

DeVore wrote: »

There seems to be complete blackout about it.

It seems like it is either stuck in limbo while they internally decide if they want to push on, or they are waiting for something else to distract people... Or a particularly bad news day that they can bury it in.

If they think we're going to let this lie, they're wrong. But then, we're keyboard warriors and vandals, right?

I'm guessing they are looking how ACTA plays out in the EU. There is a massing opposition growing against this tide of bad copyright law simultaneously sweeping the globe.

FreudianSlippers

Spacedog wrote: »

I'm guessing they are looking how ACTA plays out in the EU. There is a massing opposition growing against this tide of bad copyright law simultaneously sweeping the globe.

Our copyright law is surprisingly OK actually. I have issues with the time limits and we need some modernisation, but it's effectively good and relatively recent legislation (2000).

My point being that this SI is more about the actual process more than it is about copyright specifically. Yes, obviously it pertains to copyright, but it's not actually changing the rights. The question is and should be, how does this impact your rights? The more it is thought of as a copyright issue the more it becomes marginalised - it's about privacy and access to the internet regardless of copyright issues.
It is also about a Minister effectively ignoring the need for anything to be "democratically legitimised" (see Scarlet Extended para 113) and Charleton J's views in EMI v UPC.

KyussBishop

Spacedog wrote: »

I'm guessing they are looking how ACTA plays out in the EU. There is a massing opposition growing against this tide of bad copyright law simultaneously sweeping the globe.

Ya and I think there needs to be more noise/opposition on it here, specifically regarding ACTA; should be finding out exactly what the governments position on it is (very notable that Sherlock seems to have been a part of our ACTA negotiations), and what their intentions are on it.

It's not just the 'Irish SOPA' which is an issue; as far as I know, Ireland MEP's will be putting forward votes in the EU parliament regarding ACTA, so need to be kicking up a lot of noise/fuss on account of that.

Several other EU governments are starting to come out against ACTA, I don't see why we shouldn't be pushing for the same here; I know there is a protest against ACTA here today (and all of Europe), but there just doesn't seem to be a lot of discussion going on about it.

knick_knack

KyussBishop wrote: »

I know there is a protest against ACTA here today (and all of Europe), but there just doesn't seem to be a lot of discussion going on about it.

I'm continually surprised by the amount of people who havent even heard about it or who have choosen to say it doesnt apply to me.

Wheres the protest on at?

KyussBishop

knick_knack wrote: »

I'm continually surprised by the amount of people who havent even heard about it or who have choosen to say it doesnt apply to me.

Wheres the protest on at?

https://www.facebook.com/events/102444196549692/?_fb_noscript=1

Started an hour ago, so a bit late posting I suppose

Spacedog

KyussBishop wrote: »

Ya and I think there needs to be more noise/opposition on it here, specifically regarding ACTA; should be finding out exactly what the governments position on it is (very notable that Sherlock seems to have been a part of our ACTA negotiations), and what their intentions are on it.

It's not just the 'Irish SOPA' which is an issue; as far as I know, Ireland MEP's will be putting forward votes in the EU parliament regarding ACTA, so need to be kicking up a lot of noise/fuss on account of that.

Several other EU governments are starting to come out against ACTA, I don't see why we shouldn't be pushing for the same here; I know there is a protest against ACTA here today (and all of Europe), but there just doesn't seem to be a lot of discussion going on about it.

Any further info on Sherlock having anything to do with ACTA? If so it would re-enforce the idea that he is perhaps not the most impartial individual to be single handedly deciding the correct balance between copyright holders and citizens' civil rights.

I did a bit of letter writing to our MEPs about ACTA before this whole SI ****e kicked off. got a couple of replys, the rest being pretty tight lipped...

Thank you for your email.

In the context of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), I share your concerns, especially as regards the protection of fundamental rights such as the right of information, freedom of expression, personal data protection and the right to due process. I take the view that internet freedom should not be jeopardised by disproportionate intellectual property rights provisions. Thus, in its current form, I will not be able to vote in favour of ACTA.

I will be closely following this matter as the agreement is brought to the European Parliament for consent to ratification by the European Union.

For your information, please find attached the position taken on ACTA my political group in the European Parliament (S&D) in late 2010, as well as the legal opinions of the EP´s Legal Service, which the Legal Affairs committee voted to disclose on December 19.

Should you feel that I can be of further help on this or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Many thanks.

Phil Prendergast, MEP for Munster.

Thank you for your email outlining your opposition to ACTA. I will bring the points and concerns you have raised to the attention of Mr Aylward.

As you may be aware the European Commission has asked the European Council to authorise the signature for ACTA and then the European Parliament will be officially asked for consent. As ACTA is a mixed agreement - partly competence of the Member States - ratifications by national parliaments, including Ireland, will be required as well.

The European Parliament Committees that are responsible for this file - DEVE, INTA (Internal Market) and JURI (Legal Affairs) have already began preparatory work and have asked the Parliament legal service for opinion. We have been informed that the JURI Committee is currently checking the compatibility of ACTA with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The was concern among MEPs regarding the secrecy of the negotiations surrounding ACTA and there have been several Parliamentary questions on this issue, mostly calling for publication of the documents from negotiations.

Mr Aylward is not a member of the committees responsible for ACTA but his ALDE (Alliance of Liberals and Democrats) colleagues in these Committees have been to the forefront in asking for increased transparency and called for the European Commission to present all discussion documents, relevant studies and impact assessments on ACTA.

At present, clarification is still needed on the compatibility of ACTA with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights before a final position is taken. The MEPs are awaiting this and the feedback of their colleagues working directly on this file. Mr Aylward has received several emails from constituents concerned about the impact of this agreement on their livelihoods and access to information and will take these views into consideration ahead of full Plenary vote.

I trust this information will be of interest to you.

Yours sincerely,

Laura Real

Assistant to Liam Aylward MEP

Shane101

'Amnesty International today urged EU governments not to join the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), branding it a “Pandora’s box” of potential human rights violations.'

https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/eu-urged-reject-international-anti-counterfeiting-pact-2012-02-10

KyussBishop

Spacedog wrote: »

Any further info on Sherlock having anything to do with ACTA? If so it would re-enforce the idea that he is perhaps not the most impartial individual to be single handedly deciding the correct balance between copyright holders and citizens' civil rights.

I sent an email to Eamon Gilmore asking about ACTA, and got this in reply from a secretary:

On behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Mr. Eamon Gilmore T.D., I wish to thank you for your email of 22 January 2012, concerning the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

As this is a matter for the office of the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, I have taken this opportunity to refer your correspondence to that office for attention and direct reply to you

"Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation" i.e. Sean Sherlock. It's not definite that he was involved in negotiating ACTA, but certainly does strongly suggest it.

Polygon_window

As a musician i'm all for stopping illegal downloading, however this law is rightly described as vague and then with the possible scenario of our idiot politicians and lack lustre judicial system this could be a recipe for disaster:rolleyes:
Against it 100%

gavmcg92

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/02/13/dear-constituent-you-have-not-been-censored/

TDs have expressed dissatisfaction at the number of emails that they have recieved over ACTA, SOPAIreland, Vatican closure and the septic tank issue. The want to censor your concerns!

Keep up the emails!

DavidCollins

gavmcg92 wrote: »

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/02/13/dear-constituent-you-have-not-been-censored/

TDs have expressed dissatisfaction at the number of emails that they have recieved over ACTA, SOPAIreland, Vatican closure and the septic tank issue. The want to censor your concerns!

Keep up the emails!

While I definitely support writing emails, and have written several myself, they're not the only for of protest.

Writing actual letters (they tend to be taken more seriously generally), attending protests and actually meeting your TDs all have a more physical and immediate impact.

Scofflaw

DavidCollins wrote: »

While I definitely support writing emails, and have written several myself, they're not the only for of protest.

Writing actual letters (they tend to be taken more seriously generally), attending protests and actually meeting your TDs all have a more physical and immediate impact.

I suppose the problem is that we'd rather they took emails seriously because emails are easier for us to write....which is, of course, why they're not taken as seriously.

cordially,
Scofflaw

dahamsta

Fax works well too, I find. Politicians like official looking things, because they're morons.

southsiderosie

Scofflaw wrote: »

I suppose the problem is that we'd rather they took emails seriously because emails are easier for us to write....which is, of course, why they're not taken as seriously.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It's also an indication of how little respect that TDs have for technology that most people rely on for both work and personal communication.

Honestly, I don't understand how or why Irish politicians keep bleating about being a 'knowledge economy', yet 95% show no interest in even beginning to understand basic web technology.

Scofflaw

southsiderosie wrote: »

It's also an indication of how little respect that TDs have for technology that most people rely on for both work and personal communication.

Honestly, I don't understand how or why Irish politicians keep bleating about being a 'knowledge economy', yet 95% show no interest in even beginning to understand basic web technology.

On the other hand, you'd have to wonder what the value of a bulk email to every TD from a web-based template is. When you consider it, there's almost no other context in which we wouldn't view that as spam.

cordially,
Scofflaw

southsiderosie

Scofflaw wrote: »

On the other hand, you'd have to wonder what the value of a bulk email to every TD from a web-based template is. When you consider it, there's almost no other context in which we wouldn't view that as spam.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Bulk emails, perhaps, but at the point when people are writing personalized, reasoned emails and not getting any response because it is electronic rather than pen to paper, you have to wonder who is running the ship here.