SÓPA FAQ from TJ McIntyre (1 Viewer)

[pete]

This will give the Irish courts an open-ended power to grant orders against ISPs and other intermediaries who provide facilities which might be used to infringe copyright. This would include hosting providers, social networks, forums, video hosting sites - potentially most online services.

http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2012/01/irelands-sopa-faq.html

 

[rettucs]

http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2012/01/irelands-sopa-faq.html

so we have to start behaving ourselves?

 

[ann post]

that, or mass disobedience. you'd wanna be sharing stuff via google, facebook and twitter who all have come here and set up a lot of employment. they are hardly gonna fire those lads in the clink for facilitating a few files. i'm pretty sure thats the implication of it, though let me know how wrong it have it.

 

[pete]

everybody be cool. he's got this shit.

https://twitter.com/#!/seansherlocktd/status/159349614359756801

 

[nlgbbbblth]

he just crashes my laptop

TJ = Thomas Joseph?

 

[pete]

RewriteCond %{REMOTE_HOST} ^137\.191 
RewriteRule .* http://www.stopsopaireland.com [R=302,L]

 

[maims bond]

I would usually go against something like this but these days i'm not so sure. How is this different from, say, taking a publisher to court because they released the latest Harry Potter novel without the legal right to do so? How is it different to preventing someone taking a photographer's material and selling it on for personal gain without copyright? The internet is a relatively new phenomenon. It's global nature makes it difficult to police and copyright infringement is rife. The proposed new law - correct me if i'm wrong - will allow copyright holders to enforce their rights online. This would obviously cause problems for large community/social websites (like this one) where it would be extremely difficult to police. My view is that this is aimed solely at the pirate bay, megaupload type of site.

Have I just opened the field for abuse? Or have I started a debate?

 

[theoootini]

copyright holders should of course have some means of protecting their IP. this is not the way though:

This will give the Irish courts an open-ended power to grant orders against ISPs and other intermediaries who provide facilities which might be used to infringe copyright. This could include hosting providers, social networks, forums, video hosting sites - potentially most online services.

not to mention the fact that the measure will prove utterly useless in the long run as pirate sites will just change up and use more techy protection against whatever feeble measures the government can muster.

all this will do is cripple our rights and the rights of ISPs and forums such as this to provide a service without the fear of retribution for what its users do with that service.

 

[hugh]

Here, correct me if I am wrong here, but this whole thing is entirely based on speculation isn't it? There's no text available so everyone is up in arms about what they imagine this law is going to be. It's all based on a brief Irish Times article about how Sherlock is planning to bring in something. It could actually be the most amazing progressive piece of legislation yet devised to guarantee freedom of expression over the Internet*.

* yeah I know that's not likely but .....

 

[theoootini]

fuck it. if that's the case then maybe all the palaver will make him think twice about enacting such a thing...

 

[ann post]

imro havent said anything about this at all so far as i can tell. it is in their mission statement to "Promote the value of music to the creative, cultural and business communities in Ireland". which i'm sure facebook, youtube, twitter and google would fall under.

 

[brianoak]

https://twitter.com/#!/search?q=#opireland

 

[rettucs]

according to Sean Sherlock on drivetime yesterday, this is nothing thats not already there

which begs the question, why create new legislation if its not new and is in fact, already there

 

[pete]

according to Sean Sherlock on drivetime yesterday, this is nothing thats not already there

which begs the question, why create new legislation if its not new and is in fact, already there

http://www.tjmcintyre.com/2012/01/irelands-sopa-will-facilitate-three.html

The need for greater transparency is obvious from a second remarkable development today. In a ​

briefing note circulated to TDs and senators

(but not to you the taxpayer), Séan Sherlock has confirmed that his proposals go even further than we had thought, and address the music industry demands in the ​

EMI v. UPC

case:​

"to prevent infringement of the record companies’ sound recording copyright, through... internet “peer-to-peer” services, possibly involving a 'three strikes and you’re out' scenario. This is where the ISP sends three warnings of increasing severity and if the infringement continues, discontinues access to the Internet. It is sometimes referred to as a 'graduated response'."​

In short, the proposals aren't simply about website blocking, but could also allow courts to require ISPs to introduce three strikes systems. It's surprising and disappointing that this is happening now - after the Data Protection Commissioner has shown the unreliability of these systems by taking ​

proceedings against Eircom for wrongly threatening innocent users with disconnection

- and truly astonishing that Sean Sherlock appears content with the possibility for such systems to be introduced at the discretion of judges with no legislative controls.​

 

[rettucs]

they could like have a county that has no internet and banish people to that county for a fixed term if *they illegally download music

* I say 'they' cos I would never do such a thing.

If theres anything new or different in this legislation then that makes Sean Sherlock a damn liar.

 

[ann post]

they could like have a county that has no internet and banish people to that county for a fixed term if *they illegally download music

* I say 'they' cos I would never do such a thing.

If theres anything new or different in this legislation then that makes Sean Sherlock a damn liar.

this is nothing thats not already there

 

[rettucs]

this is nothing thats not already there

thats exactly where I had in mind.

 

[ann post]

this coincided pretty slickly with netflix's one month trial, so it did.

 

[pete]

 

[pete]

still redirecting...