An open letter from Boards.ie to Minister Sean Sherlock

dillo2k10

Liamario wrote: »

Definitely stock response, which is absolutely disgusting.

And I got the exact same reply from a different TD, Ms. Catherine Byrne.

Dear Dylan,

Thank you for getting in touch with me expressing your concern about proposed legislation in the area of copyright law.

First, I’d to clarify that Minister of State, Sean Sherlock TD, has emphasised that he has not put forward any proposals to enact a Stop Online Piracy Type Law.

Second, I’d like to emphasise that the need to legislate arises from a finding of the High Court in October 2010 that Ireland was not in compliance with its EU obligations under Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC as the High Court found itself unable, under existing primary legislation, to grant an injunction against an intermediary in relation to transient communications. As you will appreciate, failing to be in compliance with our obligations under EU law is a very serious matter.

Third, I believe it is important to emphasise that no policy change is proposed in the Statutory Instrument. It had been the intention of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 to provide civil remedies such as injunctions and it was assumed that the Act did, in fact, provide for such remedies until the High Court found otherwise in the case of EMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010. Accordingly, the wording of the proposed Statutory Instrument has been framed in a manner which merely gives effect to the wording of the EU Copyright Directive (i.e. Article 8(3) of 2001/29/EC) rather than extending its scope beyond that of intermediaries.

The intended purpose of the proposed Statutory Instrument is not to enact new EU legislation but, rather, it seeks merely to restate the position that was though to exist in the Copyright legislation prior to Mr. Justice Charleton’s judgement in the case of EMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010.

Last July Minister Sherlock held a public consultation in relation to the wording of a proposed Statutory Instrument amending Section 40 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. More than 50 submissions were received from interested parties, providing an excellent overview of all the issues and concerned involved. Minister Sherlock has engaged extensively with interested parties in respect of their views and concerns.

The legislative measure is expected to be introduced shortly.

I hope this clarifies matters.

Kind regards,
Catherine Byrne TD

And there goes a vote.


She mentioned that they must do it due in order to be in compliance with EU Directives, but did an EU court later find that the Directive was unconstitutional because it could prevent free speech online.

davehey79

Just got the same stock email reply as above from Fine Gael TD for Longford & Westmeath James Bannon.

RangeR

davehey79 wrote: »

Just got the same stock email reply as above from Fine Gael TD for Longford & Westmeath James Bannon.

At least you got a response. Kildare North aren't replying at all.

OhMSGlive

RangeR wrote: »

At least you got a response. Kildare North aren't replying at all.

Neither are Galway East.

matrim

Liamario wrote: »

Definitely stock response, which is absolutely disgusting.

Why is it disgusting? If you are getting a stock email from a lot of people, you will have a stock response.

If you want something else respond to his email in more details and debate his stock response, or as mentioned call into his office.

dmw07

Well one TD will not be getting my vote again.

lmmoonbeam1976

this is what i got back from 1 out 4 td in Dublin West



Patrick Nulty ✆ Patrick.Nulty@oireachtas.ie

15:06 (1 hour ago)

to me
Hello Lisa,
Sorry, I sent the wrong email a moment ago.
I very much see where you are coming from and share the concerns raised.
I will be submitting a question to the Minister on this today and I am happy to ask questions to Sean Sherlock, the relevant Minister, on your behalf.
Regards,
Patrick.

dahamsta

I was around #250, zero replies from Cork East, which includes Sean "I'm Signing It Anyway, Feck Democracy" Sherlock himself. Pretty sure he got a preference from me the last time. Know for certain that he won't get one next time unless he does a major u-turn on this.

antoinolachtnai

If you are in Sean Sherlock's constituency, it would be really valuable for the whole campaign if you could take the time to go and meet him in person.

Dacelonid

dmw07 wrote: »

Anthony

Thank you for getting in touch with me expressing your concern about proposed legislation in the area of copyright law.

First, I’d to clarify that Minister of State, Sean Sherlock TD, has emphasised that he has not put forward any proposals to enact a Stop Online Piracy Type Law.

Second, I’d like to emphasise that the need to legislate arises from a finding of the High Court in October 2010 that Ireland was not in compliance with its EU obligations under Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC as the High Court found itself unable, under existing primary legislation, to grant an injunction against an intermediary in relation to transient communications. As you will appreciate, failing to be in compliance with our obligations under EU law is a very serious matter.

Third, I believe it is important to emphasise that no policy change is proposed in the Statutory Instrument. It had been the intention of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 to provide civil remedies such as injunctions and it was assumed that the Act did, in fact, provide for such remedies until the High Court found otherwise in the case of EMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010. Accordingly, the wording of the proposed Statutory Instrument has been framed in a manner which merely gives effect to the wording of the EU Copyright Directive (i.e. Article 8(3) of 2001/29/EC) rather than extending its scope beyond that of intermediaries.

The intended purpose of the proposed Statutory Instrument is not to enact new EU legislation but, rather, it seeks merely to restate the position that was though to exist in the Copyright legislation prior to Mr. Justice Charleton’s judgement in the case of EMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010.

Last July Minister Sherlock held a public consultation in relation to the wording of a proposed Statutory Instrument amending Section 40 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. More than 50 submissions were received from interested parties, providing an excellent overview of all the issues and concerned involved. Minister Sherlock has engaged extensively with interested parties in respect of their views and concerns.

The legislative measure is expected to be introduced shortly.

I hope this clarifies matters and thank you for contacting me.

Kind regards,
Ray Butler TD

From Meath West, Ray Butler TD FG

The response from James Bannon, also in Longford Westmeath constituency

Dear Kenneth

Thank you for getting in touch with me expressing your concern about proposed legislation in the area of copyright law.

First, I’d to clarify that Minister of State, Sean Sherlock TD, has emphasised that he has not put forward any proposals to enact a Stop Online Piracy Type Law.

Second, I’d like to emphasise that the need to legislate arises from a finding of the High Court in October 2010 that Ireland was not in compliance with its EU obligations under Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC as the High Court found itself unable, under existing primary legislation, to grant an injunction against an intermediary in relation to transient communications. As you will appreciate, failing to be in compliance with our obligations under EU law is a very serious matter.

Third, I believe it is important to emphasise that no policy change is proposed in the Statutory Instrument. It had been the intention of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000 to provide civil remedies such as injunctions and it was assumed that the Act did, in fact, provide for such remedies until the High Court found otherwise in the case of EMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010. Accordingly, the wording of the proposed Statutory Instrument has been framed in a manner which merely gives effect to the wording of the EU Copyright Directive (i.e. Article 8(3) of 2001/29/EC) rather than extending its scope beyond that of intermediaries.

The intended purpose of the proposed Statutory Instrument is not to enact new EU legislation but, rather, it seeks merely to restate the position that was though to exist in the Copyright legislation prior to Mr. Justice Charleton’s judgement in the case ofEMI Ireland & others v. UPC in October 2010.

Last July Minister Sherlock held a public consultation in relation to the wording of a proposed Statutory Instrument amending Section 40 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000. More than 50 submissions were received from interested parties, providing an excellent overview of all the issues and concerned involved. Minister Sherlock has engaged extensively with interested parties in respect of their views and concerns.

The legislative measure is expected to be introduced shortly.

I hope this clarifies matters.


Kind regards

James

Canned responses indeed

dmw07

Dacelonid wrote: »

Canned responses indeed

Anthony

Thank you for your additional email and in response, I feel my response to your email was informed, up-to-date and substantive. It was addressed to you personally to answer your comment about it being an auto-response.

I will inform the Minister of your serious concerns about this legislation and your request for it to be 're-considered'.

Once again, thank you for contacting me with your views.

Kind regards,
Ray Butler TD

Apparently, forwarding me someone else's words, in reply to a query i had, is considered informed and substantive. Perhaps Ray wrote the template response and i'm being hard on him.

kwyjibot

Got the same FG stock reply from Leo Varadkar's office. Someone should let them know about the typo in the mail they're all sending out (presuming this should read "thought to exist"?).

Leo Varadkar wrote:

...it seeks merely to restate the position that was though to exist in the Copyright legislation prior to Mr. Justice Charleton’s judgement...

mikom

These TD's are coming across like some shower of bums with all these template responses.

My name is URL

I've just got the one response so far, from Labour's Ged Nash.

Thank you very much for your email.

I have received a considerable number of emails from across the country in relation to the prospect of Minister Sherlock introducing the S.I. to which you refer.

In order to establish the full facts from the Minister, and to ensure that I can bring your concerns and those of others who have contacted me to his Department, I intend to discuss the matter with him face to face this week.

I fully appreciate your concerns and views on this issue, and I will bring them directly to the Minister.

Best regards,

Gerald Nash TD

Same wording that has been posted by some other members. Feck it though, a canned response is better than no response at all.

tommycahir

mikom wrote: »

These TD's are coming across like some shower of bums with all these template responses.

TBH they are getting a whole bunch of templated emails from us also (I accept some people have personalised the message sent to TDs) so to call them bums might be a bit unfair but we should push them for a personal response once we get any contact.

mikom

tommycahir wrote: »

TBH they are getting a whole bunch of templated emails from us also (I accept some people have personalised the message sent to TDs) so to call them bums might be a bit unfair but we should push them for a personal response once we get any contact.

They are public servants on a great wage with plenty of helpers and all they can reply with is Ctrl F.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iapECJKx4k0

dahamsta

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

If you are in Sean Sherlock's constituency, it would be really valuable for the whole campaign if you could take the time to go and meet him in person.

Tom has already talked Sherlock through this in detail, as have others even more qualified. Sherlock's response has been a consistent "I'm going to sign this anyway". Sherlock is not the solution to this problem, he IS the problem.

Parawind

Still nothing from East Meath, frankly if i get any form of considered response, that shows they at least understand why we are concerned i'll be impressed.

Every day i find myself becoming more and more disillusioned with our so called democracy. Can anyone actually remember the last time that an Irish government listened to the Irish people? They just seem to do a Sherlock and say "we're doing it anyway, now move along".

But perhaps its too much to expect my elected representatives to do there jobs. :rolleyes:

Dav

I got the same stock response from my local FG TD (Catherine Byrne, Dublin South Central). I don't have a huge issue with receiving a stock answer on the issue, but it's a little disappointing that some of the other points I rased in my email (I based it off the template, but spoke specifically about the threat this law poses to my job as well as our site) weren't addressed. So far it's the only response I have received. I also offered all my TDs an opportunity to post a statement on Boards to their constituents on their behalf (call it a perk of the job), so I'm waiting to see who else answers and if any of them take me up on the offer.

Lord TSC

Kind of surprised only one of the four Louth TDs (Ged Nash) replied back within the first 24 hours. I expected the likes of Gerry Adams to latch on to something like this to gain some support from younger voters...

mathepac

No response from 10 emails sent out yet (5 exact copies of the template, plus 5 follow-ups expressing my concern about "filtering") to Carlow / Kilkenny TDs plus Minister of State Sherlock.

FouxDaFaFa

Only one response so far in Galway East (I sent them about this time yesterday).

Dear Foux,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me in relation to this matter. I am available to discuss this matter with you and have previously met other constituents in relation to this issue. I usually meet people in my Ballinasloe office on Monday afternoons and meet people in Tuam on Friday afternoons and Mountbellew on Saturday mornings. I am in Dublin from Tuesday to Thursday.

When would it suit you to meet?

Regards,

Paul Connaughton T.D. (FG)

If it's going to be a stock response I wish it wouldn't be so obvious.

I sent 4 emails using the boards petition feature.

I wonder what my responses will be. From previous experience, only one of the TDs will actually reply...

dmw07

After my little tete`-a-tete´ with Mr. Butler TD Meath west, my only option really to get a proper response to my questions is to talk to him in person. He was good enough to reply to my mail, i hope he can be reached in person also.

antoinolachtnai

If he is offering to meet you about the topic, that is pretty good and very responsive. It is important that you do this if at all possible.

TDs get loads of representations about all sorts of things. It is important to make an appearance to show how important you consider this.

Hellrazer

I still havent gotten a response from one TD in North Kildare.Nothing not even a stock response.

antoinolachtnai

One other thing - all the petitions and meetings have made a difference so far. The government thought this thing was supposed to be all done-and-dusted by the end of January. It is still hanging on and hasn't been resolved. The reason is because ordinary voters have made an appearance at their local TD's clinic and told them that they are unhappy with this. If enough people turn out, we will convince the government to change their position.

Crackle

I sent the email to all 3 Cork north west TDs and have so far only received this reply from an assistant to Aine Collins:

Dear ***

Thank you for your email to Deputy Áine Collins TD which was received in to the office today. I will bring your communication to the Deputy's attention at the earliest opportunity.

With kind regards,

Catherine Brosnan
Parliamentary Assistant to Áine Collins, TD
Fine Gael, Cork North West

But earlier today, while I was working, I had a missed call on my mobile. A quick Google search of the number shows it as a number for Leinster House. Who exactly was calling I have no clue but they're the only responses I've had so far.

dmw07

Crackle wrote: »

A quick Google search of the number shows it as a number for Leinster House.

Don't tell me they are making dodgy phone calls from Leinster house again!

:pac:

johnnydenims

anyone get a reply from waterford TD?