Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)

My Department recently carried out a public consultation in regard to this matter. The consultation document set out the background to the matter arising from the judgment issued by Mr. Justice Charleton in the High Court in the case of EMI Records (Ireland) Limited and others v. UPC Communications Ireland Limited. It indicated that it had been considered heretofore that injunctions, as required under Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, known as the copyright or info soc directive, were already available in Irish law under subsection 40(4) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000.

However, in the judgment referred to, Mr. Justice Charleton held that he was constrained by the wording of the 2000 Act and could not grant an injunction, as sought, in regard to infringement of copyright against an information service provider in the circumstances of "mere conduit", as set out in the EU e-commerce directive, 2000/31/EC. Accordingly, and for the avoidance of doubt, the consultation document indicated that it was considered necessary to restate Ireland's compliance with the directives concerned. In proposing to do so, it was pointed out that the Department was particularly conscious of the importance of online content and digital businesses in the Irish context and that, accordingly, it was simply seeking to ensure Ireland's continued compliance with its obligations under the relevant EU directives, following the decision of the High Court in the aforementioned UPC case.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

The consultation document also contained the text of a proposal to amend the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, by means of a statutory instrument under section 3 of the European Communities Act 1972, which had been drawn up after careful consideration and in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General. Arising from the public consultation, more than 50 submissions were received from interested parties. Several of these submissions contained legal argument in regard to the issue, including, in at least one case, advice of senior counsel, as well as detailed comments in respect of the draft statutory instrument which was published as part of the consultation process. These comments are being considered by my Department in conjunction with its legal adviser and the Attorney General's office.

See this speech in context