Explore

Show in map

General Resources - Iran

Freedom House, Iran, http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2013/iran#.U-ymB_ldVEI Small Media, Iranian Internet Infrastucture and Policy Reports, http://smallmediafoundation.com/term/1/11
Institution (Description)

Regulatory Entity: Committee for Determining Instances of Criminal Web Content

Under the Computer Crimes Law, the Committee for Determining Instances of Criminal Web Content (CDICWC) is the regulatory entity, which is entitled to issue orders against ISPs regarding the legality, blocking and removal of online content. The orders of the CDICWC do not involve judicial review and the ISPs must comply under severe penalties. The CDICWC is under the authority of the Supreme Court of Cyberspace.
Proposed Law

Copyright and Other Intellectual Property Law Provisions Bill 2018

On 13th, March, 2018, the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation, Ms. Heather Humphreys T.D., and the Minister of State for Training, Skills, Innovation, Research and Development, Mr. John Halligan T.D. welcomed the publication of the Copyright and Other Intellectual Property Law Provisions Bill 2018. The Bill is in response to a Report entitled “Modernising Copyright” published in October 2013, which was compiled by an independent Copyright Review Committee appointed in 2011.
Paper/Research

Ireland Study on blocking, filtering and take-down of illegal Internet content

(prepared by Swiss Institute of Comparative Law for Council of Europe)
This is one of series of country reports prepared for the Council of Europe in 2015. Other countries' reports, and responses from national governments, are available here. The studies undertake to present the laws and, in so far as information is easily available, the practices concerning the filtering, blocking and takedown of illegal content on the internet.
Court Decision

Walsh v Twitter

High Court of Ireland
(1) Twitter International Company was ordered to disclose data about the source of tweets about a whistleblower. The tweets, which included allegations of insurance fraud, are alleged to be defamatory. The whistleblower has brought a defamation action against the poster of the tweets, and asked the court to require Twitter to turn over information that would allow the whistleblower to identify the poster. (2) The Court order Twitter to turn over the poster’s name. The Court also issued an injunction to prohibit the destruction of any evidence or records related to the tweets.