If only it were true that this makes Ireland "the first in the world". In fact there are already three-strikes laws in France, South Korea, New Zealand, Taiwan, and (though not yet fully implemented) the United Kingdom. In a sense Ireland doesn't even rate a mention against these countries, because its "three strikes" system is not law, but just the policy of a single (admittedly large) ISP.

France's law is the first and most draconian. In its original form, which did not require a court judgment before the user was disconnected it failed a constitutional challenge, but it has since been re-introduced and remains on the books.

A favourite quote of mine comes from the judgment of an Australian Federal Court judge in a case decided earlier this year, in which he said:

One need only consider the lengthy, complex and necessary deliberations of the Court upon the question of primary infringement to appreciate that the nature of copyright infringements within the BitTorrent system, and the concept of “repeat infringer”, are not self-evident. It is highly problematic to conclude that such issues ought to be decided by a party, such as the [ISP], rather than a court. Copyright infringement is not a simple issue.

No. I'm here at the IGF in Sharm el Sheikh, and this book launch was a scheduled event in a separate room dedicated for the launch at this time. Your theory might have been correct if the poster had been erected in the main session room where other discussions were going on, but this was not so.

The Consumers International IP Watch List is a counter-USTR 301 Report, released simultaneously, which lists countries according to our friendly their IP laws are to consumers, rather than how strongly those laws benefit creators. On this list, interestingly, the US is listed in the same company as China and India, countries which it strongly criticises in its 301 Report! The worst of all countries in the Consumers International list is the United Kingdom.