UPDATE: ISPs, pollies & activists speak out on internet filter

 

Mixed support for Government announcement.

Electronic Frontiers Australia has expressed concern over the Federal Government's decision to introduce mandatory ISP-level filtering, as several ISPs indicated support contingent on further "consultation".

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy today revealed the Government's intention to introduce legislation to block "refused classification" content hosted on overseas servers.

EFA spokesman Colin Jacobs told iTnews the Federal Government's stance on just blocking child pornography was misleading.

"Refused classification is definitely more than just illegal child pornography," Jacobs said.

"It's anything that doesn't fit into the Classification Board's other ratings and that include video games aimed at adults, criminality and euthanasia and all sorts of controversial things."

"Our concern is that once there is a secret blacklist in place it is going to be very difficult for the public to know what's on it and if it will be increased in scope as time goes on."

Primus backs policy

But a participant in the controversial trials, Primus Telecommunications, backed the Government's policy "to block online child pornography".

He said that Primus would "work with the Government to further develop and implement" the policy.

"Primus Telecom believes that the introduction of an ISP filtering regime into Australia requires a balance between protecting Australians' rights of free expression and access to information with the need to improve online safety and the need to take action against the providers of objectionable content," Bhatia said in a statement.

"The scope and operation of an ISP filtering regime for on-line safety needs to be governed by a set of clear and focused policy principles, use efficient and effective processes in determining and removing prohibitions on content, and operate in a transparent and accountable manner.

"[We welcome] the chance to expand on these matters in further consultation with the Government."

Telstra's reaction

Telstra's group managing director of public policy and communications David Quilty was also supportive of the Government's intention "to legislate its approach, thereby ensuring that it applies across the industry, is clearly spelt out and is enforceable by law.

"We also welcome Senator Conroy's commitment to consult further with ISPs on the details of the Government's plans," he said.

Family First sees 'fine line'

Family First Senator Steve Fielding welcomed the release of the Enex report on this year's controversial filter trials, and also put up his hand to participate in further consultation processes.

"I believe there needs to be some sort of filtering on the Internet the same way every other medium has some level of protection," Fielding said.

"We all know there is some pretty awful stuff on the web and we need to make sure this doesn't make its way into our homes.

But he warned: "There's a fine line sometimes between filtering and censorship and it's important we get this balance right."

Coalition seeks independent audit

Shadow Communications Minister Tony Smith called for an independent audit of the Enex test results before he would add support to the mandatory filtering plan.

"Our concern with Labor's proposed mandatory filtering plan has always been that it would be both unworkable and ineffective," Smith said.

"Whilst the Coalition remains concerned that the Rudd Government's approach will simply be unmanageable, we have also said from the beginning that we were prepared to assess any credible trial results.

"Now that Senator Conroy has finally produced the report, that detail needs to be assessed."

Smith said an audit of the Enex report "should occur as soon as possible."

He also said the Coalition "will consult extensively with Telstra, other ISP providers and relevant stakeholders over coming weeks, and will examine the government's proposals in detail."

Democrats slam proposal

The Democrats slammed the Government's decision to push ahead with mandatory internet censorship, branding it "a waste of taxpayers' money and a violation of their freedom".

Its national technology policy coordinator Geordie Guy also said it established "a bad precedent for Government control of information."

Guy said internet users generally were "still waiting for some sort of sensible explanation from the Senator about why this is a better idea than empowering law enforcement and supporting the choices of individual Australians."

"Those who have been able to access the [Enex] report have been disappointed with page after page of jargon and graphs," he said.

"The missing context of any assertions is horrifying. There's not even detail of how many people participated in the trial, whether they requested to do so or really under what sort of conditions."

 

More to come...

Read the latest breaking news on the filtering announcement here.


UPDATE: ISPs, pollies & activists speak out on internet filter
"This is why this forum needs an edit button. When I read my name in your post Maxxi, I hit the quote button and promptly forgot there were more posts after that one. Woops. I'm sure that if you ..."
By Slatts
 
 
 
Comments: 25
btone
Dec 15, 2009 4:43 PM
Amazing. I never thought I would see a statement from Senator Fielding that was more sensible than the self serving, apologist, band wagon climbing, lowest common denominator aimed drivel from the Primus and Telstra clones.

Strange days indeed.

Oh, and welcome to the technological 3rd world, Conroy just trampled the ashes from the extinguished light on the hill. Democracy? Free speech? Yeah right...
Robby
Dec 15, 2009 4:58 PM
No wonder the Christian lobby groups were happy stakeholders the other week - they knew it was going to be implemented. No more public debate about abortion or euthanasia or anything else the Christian groups feel is inappropriate.

RIP Free Speach in Australia in 2010 - I knew thee well!
djzort
Dec 15, 2009 5:06 PM
rip free speech? did you forget (along with how to spell) that australia has no provision for free speech?

nevertheless. australia voted in labor, and this is what we gotten. thanks australia.
Rhino
Dec 15, 2009 5:26 PM
Well done all you Labor voters, you're just set the country on a disgraceful path which we will never recover from.

Well done.
RDEFCON1
Dec 15, 2009 5:40 PM
Hooray! I always wanted to Australia to be more like China.

One more step towards communist rule.
regan
Dec 15, 2009 7:37 PM
The TOR protocol will by-pass this.

Here is a new product:

http://pymblesoftware.com/store/index.php/systems/tin-foil-hat-isp-filtering-by-pass-router.html

Slatts
Dec 15, 2009 9:33 PM
I guess I'm a bit thick.
wasn't there supposed to be an opt out option?
has that been revoked?
Mordd
Dec 15, 2009 10:24 PM
Black Tuesday - 15th December 2010 - the day the internet died in Australia.
BlastedUser
Dec 15, 2009 11:24 PM
Geez, there are no such things as 'known child pornography sites'. If they are found, they are closed down because they are illegal in any country, so let's stop using that as an excuse. Let's not forget, the ISPs and other experts have already said that users of illegal content such as these hide their tracks and use encryption to avoid detection, the same methods that the ordinary Australian citizen will have to start using just to bypass this censorship. This will make outlaws out of all of us!
tallguy
Dec 15, 2009 11:30 PM
Anyone who really wants to access RC content will find a way. Unfortunately as far as I know most of those ways can make them harder to track down if they are doing something really bad...
Jahm Mitt
Dec 15, 2009 11:53 PM
The great thing about all of this religious or "culty" guff, is that all the sheeple groveling in their steeple, they all have "opinions" about what their deity is "saying" and righteously so, but the deity in the last few thousands of years of "omnipotence", has never once put in a personal appearance.

You know like if "JC and the Space Cadets" were a rock band - the clueless would have caught on that while the promoters claim that they play in gigs all over the land, but they have never turned up; while the clueless and stupid keep rocking up and buying the tickets.

Losers.

So the same overlording us with more holier than thou drivel, is projected into the area of computer games and internet sites.

Again while people get slaughtered for fun and profit in the movies and the real world, playing computer games doing the same stuff is just not on?

Why?

Am I surprised that the people thrusting their liturgical loins at the censors office for "standards and decency" are not trying to put the shackles on those who choose to have their own autonomous opinions, by declaring them to workers of the devil, sorcery and witches - starting with the jabbings for the devils mark.

Am I even further surprised that this is now extending into the Great Australian Firewall.

Perhaps those who cry loudest are those who look forlornly upon the promises of the bible, such as Ezekiel 23: 21 "whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of stallions."

I mean who wouldn't want that or to be getting that?

I mean thank god Conroy is standing up for real Christian family values.

Jesus said in Revelation 2:22-23 "And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works."

So Jesus wants to kill our kids - that's cool cause it is Jesus.

Timbo says I Timothy 2:11-14 "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."

So all the women ought to keep their traps shut. I mean it's in the bible - so it must be true right.

And God digs killing pregnant chicks by knifing them and smashing their kids brains out on the ground; so the christians have got this family values stuff down pat: Hosea 13:16 "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up."

So Conroy and his catholic buddies have got this right - we have to be protected against them out there on the internet and subjugate ourselves to the righteous christians showing us how their god loves us and how we ought to be kissing his ass, on the basis of their say so.

Oh did I mention that the old testament is a scammed copy of the Code of Hammurubi? The King of Babylons state laws - and the first 6 books of the bible are bare faced rip offs of this, just rebranded to a diety instead of the king?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_code_of_Hammurabi.pdf

Yep gotta remember them good old christian family values, the true word of god is the bible... except that getting nailed for copyright and plagarisim wasn't invented then.
jforjustin
Dec 16, 2009 3:59 AM
Please, iTnews, help us stop this dangerous development.

Has nobody read "Nineteen Eighty Four"?

How about Pastor Neimoller:

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me."

I stress that I have two children, and absolutely no interest whatsoever in child pornography. But I am prepared to be responsible for protecting my own children against such things.

It is not the government's job to appoint people to decide what we are allowed to think.

Our prime minister may love Jesus, but frankly most of the rest of us don't particularly. This censorship goes against the mandate of a government elected by the majority of people, who chose the centre-left over the centre-right.

Ghat
Dec 16, 2009 8:25 AM
I think that people are missing the big picture here:
Liberals: Gun control to reduce crime (public protection): Has it?
Labour: Censorship to reduce crime (public protection): see a pattern here?
Australia Army: over the last 10 or so years has had more training in urban pacification: Scared yet?

Oh and a final note: most MMOs (World of Warcraft, Aion, Vanguard etc) are not able to be rated (classified), are they going to block them too?
Mordd
Dec 16, 2009 8:41 PM
GetUp is running a campaign to raise awareness about the filter legislation and to utilise people power to try and stop the legislation from being passed. I would highly recommended everyone signup here:

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet/442

Then use GetUps tool to send an email alert to everyone you know to bring this to their attention. This is no longer just an issue for techies, activists or journalists, this is now an issue that every net user in Australia needs to be aware of!
CDMJB
Dec 17, 2009 8:40 AM
VPS anyone ?

Oh and Jahm Mitt - gee you have a mighty fine chip on your shoulder, you've posted the same over the top rant on three different articles! Yes the Christian party has had a hand in this and yes Conjob believes he is up-holding Christian vaules in his goals but that doesnt open the door for you to let loose your religious hate. The main goal here is to speak out about something that will revoke our freedoms not quote parts of a religious text out of context and then claim the text itself is a plagiarism.
imortl
Dec 17, 2009 9:12 AM
Slatts is spot on. There was supposed to be an opt out option.

We will be the ONLY "Western Democracy" in the world to have this as a MANDATORY implementation.

The worst part is that Conroy is fudging the report to say what he wants, not say what it found.

All the reports are here.

http://www.dbcde.gov.au/online_safety_and_security/cybersafety_plan/internet_service_provider_isp_filtering/isp_filtering_live_pilot#report

They even admit that it will not be hard to bypass.

That is my major beef is that it WILL NOT BE EFFECTIVE! The $128 MILLION would be far better spent on Law Enforcement!
Maxxi
Dec 17, 2009 11:10 AM
Ghat, let's make it interesting: I will bet you $200 right now that WoW will not be blocked?

Let's replace unfounded speculation with conviction, sort the men out from the boys, put a lid on the gamers scaremongering...

C'mon, $200 is not much when you know you are right?

True?

BTW: Did gun control reduce crime rates and the severlty id crimes and gun related violence? Of course it did, the question is to what degree and how do you measure that...?
Maxxi
Dec 17, 2009 11:14 AM
rdefcon, more like china...?

As in we are eating more rice now, or we will have a billion people soon, or that we will a bloody great crumbling wall running across part of the country, or we will now make and export tons of cheap and lousy products?

We certainly will not proxy off the whole country, we will not have 30,000 folks manually checking the web as filter list builders, we will continue to allow forums such as this and WP, we are not jailing people for writing anti-gov stuff on the web.

So tell then, just how are we like China now?

Oh yeah, we are eating more rice, I forgot...
Maxxi
Dec 17, 2009 11:18 AM
Hey Slatts, the second level of the filtering is an opt-in / opt-out option...

The core ALP policy has been mandatory ISP blacklist filtering for years, irrespective of the interpretation in the forums and media of statements prior to the 2007 election.

The documentation from the ALP will confirm that.

The basis opt-out option is always there, it is called the "off" switch... >;))
sputnik
Dec 17, 2009 7:34 PM
@Maxxi...

So Stephen Conroy telling us we would be able to opt out was just our imagination?

Or the Labor party policy document that says the filter would be OFFERED to keep CHILDREN from seeing bad content?

These statements have all been well researched, a quick bit of Googling will prove Stephen Conroy said we could opt out. In fact, here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/31/2129471.htm
FLashy
Dec 17, 2009 10:40 PM
Labor Party: how to lose government without really trying.
Mr Conroy will censor us and we will censor his party in the next election.
Censorship begins at home not at your ISP.
If we go the way of FINLAND, which has ISP filtering for it's citizens, goodbye Labor party.
Maxxi
Dec 17, 2009 11:26 PM
@sputnik: In all cases, the ALP election policy document takes precedence,both politically and legally, over statements made by members and officials.

Always.

Take this paragraph, which has been misinterpreted more times than I care to remember:

"Provide a mandatory ‘clean feed’ internet service for all homes, schools and public computers that are used by Australian children. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will filter out content that is identified as prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). The ACMA ‘blacklist’ will be made more comprehensive to ensure that children are protected from harmful and inappropriate online material."

And this telling sentence:

"Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will filter out content that is identified as prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)."

ISPs **WILL** filter, not may filter...

The quotation is a cut and copy directly from the document. And it is mandatory.

@Flashy: There is a good reason why traffic lights and Stop signs are on the carriageways and not in cars: The controls need to apply to all users of the carriageways, and you cannot depend on the individual drivers to install and maintain the traffic control mechanismin their cars.

Traffic lights are mandatory controls for all road users for very good reasons...

The Finns did not change their government due to filtering at all, indeed it is a "no issue" for the majority of Finns who do not even notice that they are being filtered....
Sams
Dec 18, 2009 11:41 AM
"Traffic lights are mandatory controls for all road users for very good reasons..."

I suppose you are going to tell us that traffic lights "censor" the traffic now ...
Slatts
Dec 19, 2009 7:14 PM
Maxxi wrote:
Hey Slatts, the second level of the filtering is an opt-in / opt-out option...

The core ALP policy has been mandatory ISP blacklist filtering for years, irrespective of the interpretation in the forums and media of statements prior to the 2007 election.

The documentation from the ALP will confirm that.


Looks like I was taken in then Maxxi.
I would have sworn I'd read a Conroy quote somewhere that the filter was to be opt out.
I suppose if it was out there, someone would have supplied a link to it by now.



something like that perhaps.

I hadn't heard about the optional extras that the ISPs are to be encouraged to supply till this lot hit the fan.

Maxxi wrote:
The basis opt-out option is always there, it is called the "off" switch... >;))


Well there you go.
I thought it was called "The proxy server" ;-p
Slatts
Dec 19, 2009 8:12 PM
This is why this forum needs an edit button.

When I read my name in your post Maxxi, I hit the quote button and promptly forgot there were more posts after that one.

Woops.

I'm sure that if you followed the wikipedia link that I supplied you'd have seen that the next paragraph started:

wikipedia wrote:
In May 2008, the government commenced an $82 million “cybersafety plan” which included an additional mandatory filter with no opt-out provision. This ISP-based filter aims to stop adults from downloading content that is illegal to possess in Australia, such as child pornography or materials related to terrorism.[37]


So 28 days after Rudd was sworn in Conroy was saying that adults would have the option to opt out of his filter.
5 months later the opt out option was moved to a second level filter.
Is it any wonder that people think he's making it up as he goes along?

Hmm where was I...
I started writing this about 40 minutes ago then went in search of a youtube link from life of Brian re: "he's making it up as he goes along" and got caught in the monty python clips...

OK,
So the written policy never spoke of an opt out option for the filter you say.
A politician should live and die by his sound bites.
How many voters are going to download and read the parties policy statements?
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Windows 8: Under the hood
Part One of iTnews' enterprise guide to Windows 8.
 
iTnews on tour: The Executive Summit Series
Join us in Sydney and Melbourne to meet Australia's tech leaders.
 
Meet Westpac's new technology leaders
Engineering realigned under CTO.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Was your 2012 IT budget...




   |   View results
Cut by less than ten percent?
  15%
 
Cut by more than ten percent?
  34%
 
Flat
  27%
 
Increased by less than ten percent?
  7%
 
Increased by more than ten percent?
  16%
TOTAL VOTES: 409

Vote
Will you still use DropBox and other cloud storage in the wake of the Megauploads saga?

   |   View results
Yes
  65%
 
No
  35%
TOTAL VOTES: 303

Vote