Results 2,621-2,640 of 13,254 for speaker:Seán Sherlock

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: No. I draw attention to the circumstances that would obtain if we were not a party to the EMI and others v. UPC case. It could be stated that, under the Copyright Act 2000, the right to seek an injunction over an infringement already existed. We are merely restating that position. The reason for much of the controversy on this stems from the fact that this issue has been arising for well...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: On Deputy Eoghan Murphy's point, Ireland has the concept of the take-down notice. I use www.boards.ie and there are other examples with which we are all familiar, such as YouTube. If a person becomes a member of www.boards.ie, the presumption is that the person has signed up to a set of behavioural protocols by which he or she will abide, and will not say anything defamatory or do anything...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I refer to Deputy Ferris's point. People are interpreting this as us doing the bidding of the large corporations. This is not the stop on-line piracy act, SOPA. We are not extending massive powers of intervention so that we can step into the breach to try to protect one side over another. This is not SOPA legislation. This is balancing the right of a copyright holder against the right of...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: At this point, I will address the points submitted by the Technical Group in regard to the statutory instrument. I will briefly give my analysis of them. There is not a great deal of difference between the two statutory instruments. I respect the point made. We are not setting out a new policy framework but clarifying legislation through an amendment to the copyright Act. We are going...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I thank Deputies for a considered and thoughtful debate. Our key belief is that we cannot trample on the rights of individual citizens or businesses. We are trying to uphold that belief and all we are doing with this amending legislation is ensuring we are on the right side of EU law. Copyright is a principle to which this State adheres but I reiterate it is not a superior right for the...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I listened to the Deputy. People speak about the cost of defence. Just because one applies for an injunction, the judge will not necessarily grant it. We must have regard for the rights of individual companies to conduct their business and for citizens to express themselves freely. Nobody is trampling on those rights. This statutory instrument restates a position which we already held...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: In regard to signing the statutory instrument, I have addressed the issues raised by the Technical Group. I have already stated that it is our intention to proceed with the statutory instrument. The State has been exposed on this issue, which has been ongoing since November 2010, and what we are doing is a proportionate response. We will not infringe on anybody's right to conduct a...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: In regard to the alternative statutory instrument proposed by T.J. McIntyre, I have debated the issue with him in public media and I am not averse to engaging with the digital rights community with a view to hammering out a strategy. However, we have to implement the statutory implement and we are doing so on foot of advice from two Attorneys General. I have to take account of the sound...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I thank all who contributed to this debate and reassure citizens that this State and successive governments have invested heavily in new technologies related to the web and communications.

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: If I may be allowed to finish off-----

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: With all due respect to the Members opposite, I have taken on board the points they have made and addressed them individually. I respectfully suggest they should defer to their legal advisers. I will also defer to their legal advisers on this so that we can have a strategic conversation about how the future of the web operates in the State, but we are not changing the wording of the...

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I remind Deputy Donnelly that I have stated that on numerous occasions, with all due respect.

Proposed Statutory Instrument on Copyright: Statements (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: If I may-----

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: Some background information may be useful in appreciating the context of the proposed legislative instrument. The EU provided in the e-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC for exemptions from liability for copyright infringement for intermediary service providers in cases of mere conduit, caching and hosting, upon certain conditions. This was to provide a framework for the development of...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: I propose to take Questions Nos. 281 and 291 together. In relation to the scenario the Deputy has outlined, it is important to mention that copyright holders will not have power to compel the intermediary as stated. The copyright owner will have the right to apply to the High Court for an injunction against an intermediary in respect of works in which he holds the copyright. The proposed...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: An issue arose following a High Court judgment in October 2010 where it was stated that Ireland was not in compliance with its EU obligations under the Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC. It was held that the court could not grant an injunction against an intermediary in relation to internet transient communications. Until this judgment, it had been considered that Ireland was fully compliant...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: A consultation was held by my Department last July in relation to the wording of the proposed Statutory Instrument. More than 50 submissions were received. Some were from rights holders such as songwriters, authors and their representatives. Others were from telecom companies and businesses that carry out intermediary activities on the internet and still more were from bodies concerned with...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: A consultation was held by my Department last July in relation to the wording of a proposed Statutory Instrument amending Section 40 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000. I am most grateful to all who contributed to this consultation. It provided me with an excellent overview of all the issues and concerns involved. Legal advice, which was received with some submissions was...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: An issue arose following a High Court judgment in October 2010 where it was stated that Ireland was not in compliance with its EU obligations under the Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC. It was held that the court could not make grant an injunction against an intermediary n relation to internet transient communications. Until this judgment, it had been considered that Ireland was fully...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (31 Jan 2012)

Seán Sherlock: A consultation was held by my Department last July in relation to the wording of a proposed Statutory Instrument amending Section 40 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000. I am most grateful to all who contributed to this consultation. It provided me with an excellent overview of all the issues and concerns involved. Legal advice, which was received with some submissions, was...