Firewall Australia

[Dean from Australia]

This lunacy has just come off the wires down here in Australia...

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

The Federal Government's decision to press ahead with compulsory internet filtering has come under fire from lobby groups and the Greens.

The Government wants to pass laws to force internet service providers to block banned material hosted on overseas servers.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says he intends to introduce legislation in the first half of next year.

The legislation would require all service providers to ban refused classification (RC) material hosted on overseas servers. RC material includes child sex abuse, bestiality, sexual abuse and detailed instructions for crime or drug use.

Senator Conroy says the new filter rules are not designed to curtail freedom of speech.

"No-one can currently host RC material in Australia. That is the existing situation," he said.

"To strengthen cyber safety this Government will introduce legislative amendments to the Broadcast Services Act to require all ISPs to block material rated refused classification that is hosted on overseas servers and therefore not subject to the existing take-down regime."

But Electronic Frontiers Australia, which monitors online freedoms and rights, says the Government's plan is flawed.

"Although it may address some technical issues, what it leaves out is far more important," vice chair Colin Jacobs said.

"Exactly what will be blocked? Who will decide and why is it being attempted in the first place?"

Mr Jacobs says the ease with which users can circumvent the filtering raises questions about what it is actually trying to accomplish.

"What we're talking about is a filter that can only intercept accidental access to prohibited material," he said.

"Any motivated user will be able to get around it, it will be quite easy, so who is this being targeted at?"
'Great firewall of Australia'


A list of the Government's banned sites leaked back in March turned out to include the websites of a dentist and a tuckshop consultant.

Now the Government says an independent body should determine which sites should be blocked.

Oliver MacColl, the acting national director of lobby group GetUp!, says Senator Conroy's firewall plan hands control of the internet to "the moral minority".

"It was through public complaints mechanisms like the one Mr Conroy is proposing that classic literature such as The Catcher in the Rye, Ulysses and The Story of the Kelly Gang were once banned in Australia," he said.

"Innocent people, such as a dentist from Queensland, have already been caught in the ACMA blacklist. The introduction of Mr Conroy's great firewall of Australia may lead to many more innocent small business people being caught out.

"Parents are best placed to decide what their children should and should not see on the internet.

"Conroy could have given parents this choice, through an optional filtering system. Instead he has opted to put the Government into every living room in Australia."
Greens attack plan


Telstra has released a statement saying it supports a refused classification content blacklist compiled from a complaints-based system and known child abuse websites passed on by expert agencies in other jurisdictions.

And it says it supports the Government's legislative approach.

The Australian Christian lobby also backs the Government's plan, as does Family First Senator Steve Fielding.

But the Greens are not impressed.

They say they will not support the legislation and they doubt it will become law any time soon.

"It looks very much to me as though this is still a solution in search of a problem," Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said.

"The test results themselves say that the filters will be able to be circumvented. So quite honestly I don't know why the Government is persisting with this policy."

He says the more he reads, the more sceptical he gets.

"At this stage I haven't seen anything at all that justifies the implementation of mandatory net censorship in Australia," he said.

"I think there are much better ways of going about what they're trying to do. And I think this policy is going to have a very bumpy ride."

[Incognito]

Sooner or later, all material will be banned. Definition of "obscene" has always been a tricky one.

[Rock 'n' Rye]

Unfortunately Australia's cunt Prime Minister sees sexual education, euthanasia/assisted suicide, anarchist, pro choice/birth control, fascist, socialist and anti-government websites as restricted material than will harm out fragile bogan minds.

The average Australian doesn't care btw, this is evident on how nobody cares about how shit our internet already is.

[Incognito]

Originally Posted by Rock 'n' Rye

Unfortunately Australia's cunt Prime Minister sees sexual education, euthanasia/assisted suicide, anarchist, pro choice/birth control, fascist, socialist and anti-government websites as restricted material than will harm out fragile bogan minds.

But he's on Time's Top 100!

http://www.time.com/time/specials/20...735719,00.html

[Dean from Australia]

I have begun calling our dear leader Chairman Meow...fucking try hard.

[Dean from Australia]

So google has come out swinging in opposition to Australia's Internet Filtering Laws.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

By Tim Leslie (ABC News Australia).

Internet search giant Google has come out in opposition to the Federal Government's push to introduce mandatory ISP filtering.

In a post on Google Australia's official blog, the company said the plan raised concerns about censorship.

"At Google we are concerned by the Government's plans to introduce a mandatory filtering regime for Internet Service Providers (ISP) in Australia, the first of its kind amongst Western democracies," the post said.

"Our primary concern is that the scope of content to be filtered is too wide."

While Google accepted there must be some limits on internet content, it condemned the Government's filtering approach as heavy-handed.

"We have a bias in favour of people's right to free expression," the post said.

"While we recognise that protecting the free exchange of ideas and information cannot be without some limits, we believe that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.

"Some limits, like child pornography, are obvious. No Australian wants that to be available - and we agree. Google, like many other internet companies, has a global, all-product ban against child sexual abuse material and we filter out this content from our search results.

"But moving to a mandatory ISP filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond such material is heavy-handed and can raise genuine questions about restrictions on access to information."

Citing a recent report into filtering, Google said the use of refused classification (RC) as a screening tool would go far beyond restricting illegal content.

"The recent report by Professors Catharine Lumby, Lelia Green and John Hartley - Untangling The Net: The Scope of Content Caught By Mandatory Internet Filtering - has found that a wide scope of content could be prohibited under the proposed filtering regime," the post said.
'Grey realms'


"Refused classification is a broad category of content that includes not just child sexual abuse material but also socially and politically controversial material - for example, educational content on safer drug use - as well as the grey realms of material instructing in any crime, including politically controversial crimes such as euthanasia.

"This type of content may be unpleasant and unpalatable but we believe that government should not have the right to block information which can inform debate of controversial issues."

But the Federal Government maintains the new filter rules are not intended to curtail freedom of speech.

Google said the Government should instead focus on education and providing effective filtering tools for individuals.

"While the discussion on ISP filtering continues, we should all retain focus on making the Internet safer for people of all ages," the post said.

"Our view is that online safety should focus on user education, user empowerment through technology tools, and cooperation between law enforcement and industry partners. The Government has committed important cyber safety education and engagement programs and yesterday announced additional measures that we welcome."

Google also defended weighing into the controversy, saying discussion on contentious issues was needed for effective democracy.

"Exposing politically controversial topics for public debate is vital for democracy," it said.

"Homosexuality was a crime in Australia until 1976 in ACT, NSW in 1984 and 1997 in Tasmania. Political and social norms change over time and benefit from intense public scrutiny and debate.

"The openness of the internet makes this all the more possible and should be protected.

"The Government has requested comments from interested parties on its proposals for filtering and we encourage everyone to make their views known in this important debate. "

[Rock 'n' Rye]

Originally Posted by Incognito

But he's on Time's Top 100!

Kevin Rudd - The 2008 TIME 100 - TIME

That's because he pretends to be nice to brown people.

[Ant-LOX]

Wow, I think I'll learn more suicide tips, and watch a ton of girl/horse videos in your honor Australia.

[Dean from Australia]

Does this mean I won't be able to visit al Jazeera or Taliban Womens Weekly anymore? Course I only read 'em for the articles...

[Cart Horse]

Shit, I go to them for the porn.