Sensationalist headline from the Tribune this Sunday: Internet providers refuse to fund web sex abuse hotline. So have you stopped beating your wife then? That’s pretty much the same line.
The line from the article is child pornography is online and without Digiweb, Magnet, Hosting 365, Leap et al paying fees to the ISP Association of Ireland who run Hotline.ie, child porn is going to run rampant because Hotline won’t be able to keep going. Think of the children!
among the well-known companies which are not members of the Internet Service Providers’ Association of Ireland (ISPAI) – and by extension are not financially supporting its Hotline.ie service – are Digiweb, Magnet, Hosting 365, Smart Telecom and Lastmile.ie
By extension? So by extension Texaco are not in the ISPAI so they too REFUSE to fund the war on child porn?
Isn’t it odd that they can’t support Hotline.ie on it’s own but have to buy into the ISP Association if they did decide to voluntarily help in the reporting of child pornography online? Can other companies give financial support to Hotline.ie?
Why is an industry-run group tasked with logging reports about child pornography online? Well apparently our poor Gardai have enough to be doing, besides, you know, watching out for serious things like Child Pornography:
Paul Durrant, general manager of the ISPAI, told the Sunday Tribune the current approach, whereby members of the public can report suspect internet content to Hotline.ie, had been agreed after high-level discussions between the relevant authorities 10 years ago.
…
“If there is no hotline there, where are the public going to report to? Their local garda station, who have 101 things to do?” he added.
So maybe we let Toyota, Ford and Irish Toll Roads Ltd run an organisation that patrols our roads for people that commit serious crimes there? Same logic right?
Were I Digiweb and Magnet and Hosting 365 I’d be phoning my solicitor over the way they got painted in that article. I also think were the Government to actually try and regulate this they’d get a kicking in the Courts for forcing a company to pay dues to a “voluntary” organisation. We’re not obliged to join a union as individuals, why should a company be strong-armed into joining a business union? If the Government is going to fund Hotline.ie then do. Enough of threatening businesses to join a voluntary org, only part of which deals with fighting child porn.
If the Government really gave a damn about Hotline.ie wouldn’t they be funding it?
Perhaps Mr Durrant ought to ask himself the question “Why do these companies not want to join the ISPAI?”
If he’s suggesting it’s because they don’t want to join the fight against child pornography then he’d better prepare for some serious lawsuits.
The idea that the government would force a company through regulation to join an industry association is preposterous and unworkable and bad for competition as well as being bad for the industry organisation itself, as it prevents them from realising when they are not providing value for their members.
What is being suggested here by inference is that this contribution to hotline.ie would effectively be a tax on ISPs. This is actually fine but why not openly say that instead of the pretence. If it’s voluntary then it’s voluntary if it’s not it’s not, and if it’s not voluntary then government should regulate it and pay for it.
[…] Internet Service Providers aren’t coughing up for a voluntary organisation, so someone makes a leap of logic to imply they’re not thinking of the children. Captain Mulley to the rescue. […]
“We’re not obliged to join a union as individuals…”
Would that that were the case, but it’s not always.
Well said. Numpties.
I read this same item in the Sunday Tribune and dismissed it as a profile piece on an industry group running during the information-sparse silly season, not an endorsement for the good work and success of an abuse hotline.
And what exactly is the impact of hotline.ie wrapping up? Occasionally we need to zero base our initiatives, clean the deck and start anew. Like with industry awards, European constitutions, and general elections.
Well said Damien. I wonder if the Gardai have any comment on being accused by the ISPAI of not really caring enough about Child Porn to get off their arses and do something about it. Perhaps a response to such an accusation should be requested of the Commissioner who is after all, responsible for the performance of his force.
Ronan
“If there is no hotline there, where are the public going to report to? Their local garda station, who have 101 things to do?â€
That’s an absurd thing to say. Similarly, I guess we should shut down all other means of contacting the guards, and appoint some private-sector call-centre instead, as the gardai manning 999 should be busy doing other work.
Regarding the usefulness of third-party anti-child-porn organisations — this paper may be of interest:
‘We believe that the reason that the child abuse image websites are removed so slowly is that the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), who collate a list of illegal sites, is only prepared to talk directly with the hosting ISPs within the UK.
If the site is hosted abroad (which is now 99.8% of all sites) the IWF informs the UK police, who pass the message on to law enforcement in the relevant country, and that clearly leads to considerable delays. Furthermore, the same parochial attitude appears to be taken by similar organisations in other countries.
The IWF are a member of INHOPE, an association of child sexual abuse image reporting hotline organisations operating in 29 countries, and the IWF will also pass reports to the appropriate INHOPE members. However, in the US, which hosts around half of all the illegal sites, IWF tell us that NCMEC the hotline operator there will only pass on notices to their members — and that means that American ISPs do not get a timely notice.
We think it is the close involvement with the police, who have to operate within a particular jurisdiction, which leads the IWF to believe that they would be “treading on other people’s toes†if they contacted ISPs outside the UK. I assume that this is why I was firmly told in an email this week that they “are not permitted or authorised to issue notices to takedown content to anyone outside the UKâ€. Indeed, this echoed in a letter to The Guardian today by John Carr who says “The IWF cannot issue a notice to a Polish or Irish internet service providerâ€.
We don’t think there is some magical international permission given to the people who try to take down any of the other types of content we studied — from phishing, to fake escrow sites, to illegal pharmacies. It only seems to be INHOPE members, dealing with child sexual abuse images, who are not prepared to make an attempt!’
fucking brilliant. if we create bureaucracy, the only thing it will do is perpetuate its own bureaucracy further….
I feel there are considerable misquotations and misunderstandings developing here. This discussion is based on interpretation of a newspaper article which, by necessity, has over-simplifications, hasn’t room for background detail and makes statements intended to grab readers’ attention. I would therefore like to give the ISPAI position on this issue. I’m sorry it’s a bit long (but it’s to state the detail omitted in this type of newspaper story.)
ISPAI became involved with self-regulation roughly 10 years ago when recommendations of a Government appointed working group presented a stark choice to industry. That was organise a self-regulatory approach to act against illegal and harmful use of the Internet services you supply, or be subject to an alternative statutory compliance model, which would require a government body to implement and which industry would fund by means of revenue levies. ISPAI as the only ISP-specific industry body existing at the time, took on the task of organising and coordinating self-regulation. This reality has all got somewhat lost in time as the industry has burgeoned in recent years with many new entrants offering broadband and hosting.
Under European Directives transposed and in Irish law, ISPs are legally obliged to act if “given knowledge†of illegal content. We must also remove the offending material from our networks “in a reasonable timeâ€. Self-regulation achieves this through the Hotline.ie service where the public may report suspected illegal content. If illegal material is verified, Hotline.ie provides a mechanism for our members to be notified (which if you wish can be called a “take down noticeâ€) so it can be removed under minimum terms and conditions of use, governed by our ISPAI Code of Practice and Ethics. In this way our members can comply with their legal obligations. If illegal content was found in this country on ISPAI members’ facilities, for our own legal protection as much as legal duty, we would also be obliged to notify the GardaÃ.
Law enforcement (to investigate and pursue the perpetrators behind the illegal material) in this country, is a matter for the Gardaà and the Gardaà alone, and not ISPAI or the Hotline.
The other misunderstanding that seems to be in this discussion arises because on the Internet most illegal content encountered by Irish ISPs’ customers is not hosted or distributed from this country. The reason we have a Hotline at all is because primarily the illegal material reported is child pornography (CP). It was seen as desirable that the process to verify complaints of CP and trace the source should be under self-regulation but in a restricted environment, strictly controlled and with full procedural oversight of Dept. Justice and GardaÃ. If reported CP is traced by the Hotline to sources here, then it notifies the Gardaà and ISPAI member. This system does not prevent the public from reporting suspected illegal activities or content directly to the GardaÃ. The Hotline, through INHOPE or via a specific office in the Gardaà to Interpol, can expedite the transmission of the notification of illegal content to the appropriate jurisdiction. The Hotline or authorities in those countries are the only ones that can issue a “take down†in their country. This is where the confusion about local Garda stations and time or resources seems to have crept in due to a misplaced quotation.
ISPAI self-regulation is an efficient and cost-effective way of handling the legal obligations of the ISP industry. The alternative is not free. Successive Ministers of Justice have made it quite clear, if industry doesn’t take this on board voluntarily, it is would necessitate a statutory compliance model for which Government would be responsible and industry would pay by way of levies – which of course get passed on to customers if profitability is to be maintained. Our members (please see http://www.ispai.ie for who these are), strongly believe such a regulatory regime is neither in the interest of their companies nor their customers.
That is why we are eager that all ISPs (whether providing access or hosting or managed communication services) join and sign up to the code of practice and take their share of the obligations which includes the Hotline. Our fear is that if a large number of companies, even though they may not serve the majority of Irish Internet customers, do not subscribe, self-regulation could be viewed as ineffective and politically the Government would have no alternative but to act by introducing the legislative alternative.
Bottom line – its easier and cheaper for everyone (ISPs, their customers and also for government) if we can keep the current system in place. It may not be perfect but ISPAI members believe its better than the alternative.
I am not sure I’d really agree with the journalist from Sunday’s paper. I think there’s far more to the ISPAI and Hotline than meets the eye. Many of the large, Medium and Start-up ISPs, Hosts, peers and Telcos are involved can vouch for this.
A main thrust is a self-regulatory model for Internet regulation in Ireland. Whether we like it or not the government has mooted legislation (Cost, burdens and compliance) on all ISPs, telcos and hosting companies on the past and its really best avoided in my view. So @ Justin Mason supports the view that this is not good, but has a slight factual disjoin.
The IWF and ISPAI are polar opposites.
The industry and stakeholders really need to avoid the label “Ireland to Regulate the Internet” or some other claptrap.
The EU Commission partly funds the hotline initiative, which is something that is plainly vacant in term of the article research.
Perhaps posters and indeed the journalist in question should do more homework before writing inaccurate pieces.
This of course is my view which I am entitled to,
It’s very easy to base ones opinions on information, but making sure that the facts are correct is something that needs to happen.
Damien, this is by no means a quip or swipe at you, but the original article is deficient unfortunately.
Ronan Lupton
Director of ISPAI
Imagine the headline: ‘Politician refuses to fund web sex abuse hotline’
No politician will risk that headline. This poiltical truth means that these hotline organisations could be 100% ineffective in their stated mission and they would still be able to compel politicians to channel more and more funds to them.
Its not a healthy dynamic.
@Paul Durrant: So what parts of that Tribune article are inaccurate, where were you misquoted and are you going to condemn such sensationalism and ask for an apology from the Tribune?
By “here” I was referring to some comments in this discussion group and the inferences being incorrectly drawn from the Tribune article. e.g. incorrect extrapolations that ISPAI are criticising the Gardaà – we work in the way we do under agreed Hotline procedures – and the incorrect comparison with IWF as Ronan Lupton has already pointed out.
There is nothing specifically misquoted in the Tribune article itself and I did not use the word “sensationalise”. However, my “added” comment about reporting to the Gardaà unfortunately lacked the context in which it was stated – and I have explained that in my post above. Obviously short newspaper articles have to paraphrase so I welcome the opportunity of your blog to provide the missing context and background.
Paul Durrant
General Manager, ISPAI
Can we also take it that the Sunday Tribune, by not being a member of the ISPAI, is supporting Child Pornography? 😉
On a more serious note, why are ISPAI trying to argue that Hosting365 and Servecentric are ISPs when they’re clearly hosting providers – an entirely different thing? Surely the ISP Association of Ireland should know what constitutes an ISP. At least one would hope so.
I think that the ISPAI, the Gardaà and the ISPs have been done a significant disservice by the Tribune in this case.
We would actually go one further and state we are a managed services and hosted infrastructure provider. Add Servecentric, Data Electronics, Telecity, Interxion, HP, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens and every MSP with colocation to the list?
Must admit I agree with Keith. @ Stephen McCarron, who knows what legislation could bring. Effectively if comparted to WEEE and Waste Management, I shudder at the thoughts.
Hi Tom, Legislation will happen at a European level regardless. The ISPAI are not going to make a significant difference. In addition, all the current legislation (such as data retention) do not apply to us, as we do not provide services that fall under.
Stephen,
I wouldn’t be so sure about the DRED – Date Retention Enforcement Directive. National margins for appreciation are yet to be set by member states. Am working it at the moment.
Remember the music rights files share orders from the Commercial Court last year or so? Well the bulk of the downloads were on corporate equipment, so it’s a matter of time before regulation is extended. There are vested interests at stake here, more that just the CP problem.
In relation to EU legislation and regulations in general you might find they may be more forgiving than a national approach (Ringfencing and creating a rent for all).
Working in unison the industry and stakeholders – including yourself, can achieve a lot. Instead of suffering cold inertia and allowing the wheels of bureaucracy and baseless civil servants make the decisions for us regarding the future of our businesses.
Tom
Perhaps the ISPAI then should take a more conciliatory, value led approach to member recruitment, rather than driving scaremongery and ridiculous allegation in the press.
We didn’t really like the implication that not joining the ISPAI meant we somehow condoned or turned a blind eye towards the problem of child pornography. We’ve worked very efficiently with the Gardai in the past and we will continue to work with the Gardai as closely as possible whenever necessary in the future.
We’re all for the hotline and the idea of hotlines. We would have no problem in helping to support and finance a hotline organisation. We believe that if self-regulation is preferred by all stakeholders, especially the Gardai and Department of Justice, then so be it.
However, we object to having to join and finance another organisation in order to support the hotline project. Split Hotline.ie into something independent and we’ll be the first in line to support it.
Could the ISPAI disclose how much funding it requires to operate Hotline.ie? What would be the amount required from the industry partners after any European and State funding is made?
@Keith. The definition of ISP (Internet Service Provider) actually includes hosting providers since hosting, managed networks, etc ARE internet services. The current term in Ireland for an organisation who provides access to the Internet is an IAP (Internet Access Provider). The use of language in this area is very difficult and has been argued extensively during development of all types of legislation, regulations, decisions, conventions, etc… and no easy solution has ever been found. It is generally agreed now that ISP covers all ecommerce service providers (which is also a possible recursive definition..)