TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 10 °C Thursday 20 June, 2013

‘Internet freedom’ is Government priority, Gilmore tells UN

The Tánaiste’s words to the Security Council come days after a controversy over the strengthening of online copyright legislation.

Gilmore addressing the UN General Assembly last September
Gilmore addressing the UN General Assembly last September
Image: Richard Drew/AP/Press Association Images

THE GOVERNMENT WILL make ‘internet freedom’ a priority during its time at the helm of an international security organisation, Eamon Gilmore has said.

“Freedom of expression and freedom of the media” online were highlighted as key aims by the the Tánaiste during an address to the UN Security Council in New York today.

He said the Government would organise a conference for 56 countries in Dublin next June on the issues at stake around online freedoms. Gilmore was speaking weeks after Ireland took up the chair of the Organisation for Security and Co-Operation in Europe.

His comments come days after the Government was caught up in controversy over the use of a statutory instrument to strengthen online copyright legislation.

The measure was dubbed ‘SOPA Ireland’ by opponents, who said it risked jeopardising the operations of online firms including social media.

Gilmore told delegates at the UN Security Council:

We intend to prioritise the issue of internet freedom.  As in other parts of the world, the threat to freedom of expression online is ever-present in the OSCE region and appears to be growing.  We will work to ensure that existing OSCE commitments in relation to freedom of expression and freedom of the media apply to all forms and means of their exercise.

He also highlighted measures which could be taken internationally to combat “corruption, money-laundering and terrorist financing”, saying the Criminal Assets Bureau could serve as a model for other nations to consider.

Referring to the need for action to deal with conflicts occurring within some of the 56 OSCE countries, he said the Government would organise a conference on how the lessons of the Northern Ireland peace process could be applied elsewhere.

More: Tánaiste to travel to US for United Nations meetings>

Read: Ireland’s ‘SOPA’ legislation: The big arguments for and against>

  • Share on Facebook
  • Email this article
  •  

Read next:

Comments (41 Comments)

  • Where was Gilmore a week ago when Sean Sherlock was ignoring those who bothered to turn up to the Dail to debate the statutory instrument?

    Reply
  • It’s like a butcher telling you he’s only selling veggie burgers from now on.
    Don’t quite believe you dears.

    Reply
  • The first thing socially adept political psychopaths do is, upon realising that the jig is up, is to resort to censorship.
    This was the case in Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist Poland etc. They arrested as many psychologists specialising in the area of psychopathology as they could. They then proceeded to torture these scientists. If they could not threaten these men to renounce their knowledge, then they would simply kill them. At the same time, they destroyed all their written works and forced, through intimidation, the remaining scientists to discontinue the teaching of their knowledge of socially adept psychopaths.
    Bearing In mind, the proposed legislation regarding censorship of the internet, under the guise of protecting copyright holders. I have to wonder, is this a coincidence, or is it a somewhat more cynical attempt by psychopathic people, to stop us normal human beings from realising what is really happening.

    Reply
    • Nice to see someone else with a knowledge of Political Ponerology round here!!

      Reply
    • Hi, Shanti. It’s a strange discipline, of that we can agree. How strange is it that we can read a book and have our lives changed. Typically, I would have run a mile, or even a kilometre, from the idea that some knowledge could influence me to such a degree. How wrong I was. My intellect, and my sense of humour, are currently fighting it out, regarding who own’s the property rights of my reaction to this knowledge.

      S

      Reply
    • Shanti, I have to go now. I will talk to you later.

      Reply
    • Ok, Journal.ie isn’t/shouldn’t be some personal chat room for political activists. Especially ones unwilling to give their true names.

      Reply
    • Colm Political Ponerology is not any form of activism. It’s (as the book title states) “A Science on the Nature of Evil; Adjusted for Political Purposes”.
      It’s actually a book by a Polish psychologist explaining the nature of essential psychopathy and how high level functioning psychopaths manage to insert themselves into positions of power.

      You should give it a look.. Andrew Lobaczewski is the author (if I have spelled that correctly, I’m terrible at spelling Polish names).

      Reply
  • This government does not give a damn for what it’s people want and need. It just panders to the rest of the world telling other nations what they want to hear.

    Reply
  • Hypocrisy?

    Reply
  • I say the UN delegates were cracking up. The havn’t seen The Muppet Show in years.

    Reply
  • More lies Mr Tanaiste . Thing is they say more about their plans when they are outside of the country than they do when they are here ,
    Who are they trying to impress ? They remind me of a couple of over bearing ” mothers” who can not stop bragging about their kids to the neighbours but behind closed doors at home they beat the living daylights out of the same off spring . Street angels and house devils. I am sick of this.

    Reply
  • I wonder which face he was talking from at this conference?

    Reply
  • Ed 09/02/12 #

    Here we have a very good example of the labour party sticking it to themselves, copy and paste the speech and send it to his underling in the people’s republic. Morons!

    Reply
  • Did I hear that Raoire Quinn tell students in Galway recently that the online media needs to be marshalled ?
    The Labour party are great at playing both sides – capitalist and socialist – truth and lies – republican and reformist – stupid and clever – rich and poor. They have it all.

    Reply
  • This is coming from the same party that introduced censorship on RTE to block voices from the SF party leaders. I really believe Mr “Dublins way or Frankfurts way ” Gimore, who complained in the Dail about the state paying too much for land, one week after his wife received 500k for a slice of land, currently valued at 30k …. This guy wouldnt know how to ‘lie’ stright in bed….

    Reply
  • Yea, yea… the usual two faced crap and lies we have come to expect from these traitors!

    Reply
  • jimbo 09/02/12 #

    Talking through his hoop again

    Reply
  • OMG what a two faced lying t*t

    Reply
  • In fairness, anything to get this issue in the public eye more. Despite it being a two faced act, I’d rather it be recognised than ignored. Online freedom seems to be the last thing we hold free against governments and corporations. The day I can’t speak my mind and recognise freely where I’m basing my claim is the day I lose all faith in humanity. Censorship be damned I’ll fight it til the end!

    Reply
  • I have not read Mr Gilmore’s full speech but can anybody tell me did he make any reference to what is going on in Syria? I would hope he could use this stage at the U.N to also express disgust at the slaughter for what it’s worth.

    Reply
  • Link to a video of his speech?

    Reply
  • An international conference on Internet Freedoms in Ireland? Well you can go all torch-and-pitchfork all you like folks, I’m going to wait until we see the outcome of this conference before I start the vitriol.

    Reply
  • Five out of the thirteen comments in this subject are without a doubt defamatory and worthy of experimental legal action for the recovery of damages before the Circuit or High Court.
    With the high levels of unemployment among qualified and intelligent young lawyers I do believe they could have a field day here.
    This really proves the point that is worth making again again and again………..having ignored your mothers!………………..watch what you say before it takes the little you have!

    Reply
  • The need to protect intellectual property is both mandatory and indeed critical in all modern societies. However my position extends way beyond the idea that copying others ideas and creations is an acceptable form of thieving because it is carried our electronically and nobody really gets hurt.

    Anyone who publishes or causes to be published by deliberately receiving or transmitting the protected ideas or creations of others without their consent is guilty of an offence . This also includes the defaming of individuals or corporate bodies. In such cases the Courts may decide the levels of damage to property or individuals and or corporate reputations and an accused if found guilty of such may be compelled to pay financial penalties for said losses and or imprisonment where appropriate.

    I do not see how contributors to these pages can abuse the freedoms of the press and grossly defame individuals simply because they have access to an electronic keyboard.

    Reply
    • Your position is clear.

      Reply
    • Ah now Mark.. I already explained this one to you..
      These copyright laws do zilch for the people who create that intellectual property. All it does is prove that yet another industry has been deemed “too big to fail” by governments. The record label execs who are making all the money didn’t create any of it – they claim copyright but treat the artists as commodities, ripping them off every which way they can..

      Independent companies, be they publishers, record labels, games companies, movie production houses and generic drug manufacturers moved with the times, gave a fairer deal to all, and don’t seem quite as bothered by the digital revolution..

      And just as a matter of interest, do you think it’s alright that people OTHER than say, Paul McCartney own the copyright to Beatles songs?
      That Dave Grohl specifically asked John McCain to stop using the song “My Hero” on his campaign as it is about the ordinary man, and was told “tough, we paid for the rights..”

      That’s what you are supporting when you champion these laws. You are showing that you side with what are essentially “pimps”.

      Reply
    • blert 10/02/12 #

      “The need to protect intellectual property is both mandatory and indeed critical in all modern societies. ”
      I shall counter that I do tnot believe it is either mandatory or critical in any society. Societly and culture functioned just fine without Copyright and Patents. I also take issue witht eh phrase ” intellectual property”. it is a nonsense phrase that attempts to bundle three entirely seperate ideas and issue together implying they are one and the same. They are not.

      “However my position extends way beyond the idea that copying others ideas and creations is an acceptable form of thieving because it is carried our electronically and nobody really gets hurt.”

      I beleve it is not thievery(such an act requires the removal of something tangible from a person possesion) and both acceptable in the analog and digital worlds. It is in fact essential for any creation or inovation to take place. Find me anything truely original and I will be very impressed.

      “Anyone who publishes or causes to be published by deliberately receiving or transmitting the protected ideas or creations of others without their consent is guilty of an offence .”
      You are aware the very act of visiting an website, by the webs very nature, is an act of “deliberately receiving or transmitting the protected ideas or creations of others”.

      I could go on for hours nitpicking and so much of what you said. But I think you get te point.

      ” I do not see how contributors to these pages can abuse the freedoms of the press and grossly defame individuals simply because they have access to an electronic keyboard.”
      Don’t get me started on definmation. The very concept is in direct conflict the ideas of free speech and freedoms of the press. But that asside where exactly is this deffemation you claim is on this page. All I see are people expressing their views(yes perhaps harshly and usign course language) on the actions of a man in making a speech on how he believes one thing while performing actions(indirectly through supporting them) that directly contradict what he is claiming in his speech.

      Reply
    • (now this Dhak, Shanti, this is what needs to get posted)

      Mr. rogers, you’re either trolling or an opportunist law student. Either way, this would be a case of the law courts killing innovation.

      On your central thesis, while some of the comments above are/could be knee jerk reactions, written with less thought & more vitriol/hatred for the subject, they certainly aren’t making public accusations which are any different to the ones politicians are subjected to in their careers.

      No such thing as an unhated politician. All that changes is who’s doing the hating.

      Reply
    • Very True Colm.
      Mark is a very pro government and pro corporation poster. He is against the democratic right to peaceful assembly in protest to the governments actions. As he and I hae discussed before.
      The concept of vitriol against unjust rule seems a foreign concept for him, which is why I didn’t bother framing it as you did, in spite of its obvious truth :)

      Reply
  • The law is for every one Frank so now please write five hundred time ; The law is for everyone.
    Where in the name of God did you hear me suggest that legal protections would be selectively applied depending on certain financial thresholds being met!

    Reply
  • I don’t spend my days watching and waiting for someone to comment either positively or negatively on my own contributions.
    I have absolutely no difficulty in the rights of individuals and groups to express their opposition to Government policy or anything else that they wish.
    However I have a serious issue with the manner in which named persons including elected politicians are described in language that is vulgar and abusive. I have a greater problem with terms such as liar and traitor which would be defined by our Courts as injurious to a persons reputation . The right of free speech is not without it’s limits and these are exceeded with such regularity in these pages that we need to test the use of the Courts against the perpetrators.
    For some of the less intellectually endowed critics of my views try publishing child pornography and see how long your freedoms endure.
    For those who believe that intellectual property is either unreal or non specific you don’t live in the real world where economic stability is based on it’s protection.
    Believing that you are entitled to thieve because you have a grievance against the way some people carry out their business is akin to suggesting you may steal from a Bank because of the way Bankers have mismanaged our funds over the last few years.
    Please save us from this sanctimonious drivel.

    Reply

Add New Comment