| |||||||
| AustraliaMatters.com Posted September 22, 2007 Have Your Say | |||||||
No
opt-out
of ISP filtered Internet Australians will be unable to opt-out of the government's pending Internet content filtering scheme, and will instead be placed on a watered-down blacklist, experts say. Under the government's $125.8 million Plan for Cyber-Safety, users can switch between two blacklists which block content inappropriate for children, and a separate list which blocks illegal material. Pundits say consumers have been lulled into believing the opt-out proviso would remove content filtering altogether. The government will iron-out policy and implementation of the Internet content filtering software following an upcoming trial of the technology, according to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. A spokesman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the filters will be mandatory for all Australians. “Labor’s plan for cyber-safety will require ISPs to offer a clean feed Internet service to all homes, schools and public Internet points accessible by children,” Marshall said. “The upcoming field pilot of ISP filtering technology will look at various aspects of filtering, including effectiveness, ease of circumvention, the impact on internet access speeds and cost.” Internet Service Providers (ISPs) contacted by Computerworld say blanket content filtering will cripple Internet speeds because the technology is not up to scratch. Online libertarians claim the blacklists could be expanded to censor material such as euthanasia, drugs and protest. Internode network engineer Mark Newton said many users falsely believe the opt-out proviso will remove content filtering. “Users can opt-out of the 'additional material' blacklist (referred to in a department press release, which is a list of things unsuitable for children, but there is no opt-out for 'illegal content'”, Newton said. “That is the way the testing was formulated, the way the upcoming live trials will run, and the way the policy is framed; to believe otherwise is to believe that a government department would go to the lengths of declaring that some kind of Internet content is illegal, then allow an opt-out. “Illegal is illegal and if there is infrastructure in place to block it, then it will be required to be blocked — end of story.” Newton said advisers to Minister Conroy have told ISPs that Internet content filtering will be mandatory for all users. The government reported it does not expected to prescribe which filtering technologies ISPs can use, and will only set blacklists of filtered content, supplied by the Australia Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). EFA chair Dale Clapperton said in a previous article that Internet content filtering could lead to censorship of drugs, political dissident and other legal freedoms. “Once the public has allowed the system to be established, it is much easier to block other material,” Clapperton said. According to preliminary trials, the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,000 Web pages from one million.
Australia pushes further Web censorship By Jo Best A bill introduced this week by Australia's Parliament would give the Australian federal police the power to control which sites can and cannot be viewed by Australian Web surfers. The list currently includes pornography and "offensive material." However, under the amendment, federal police would be able to add other sites to the list, including content that the AFP Commissioner "has reason to believe...is crime- or terrorism-related content." The definition of material that may be liable for censorship includes Internet content that "encourages, incites or induces," "facilitate(s)" or "has, or is likely to have, the effect of facilitating" a crime. Once such content has been identified by the AFP, Internet service providers may be responsible for blocking their users from accessing it. According to the government, the legislation is designed to target phishing and terrorist sites, among other online criminal activity. "The new arrangements will allow harmful sites to be more quickly added to software filters," said Eric Abetz, a senator for Tasmania, who introduced the bill. "Of course the best outcome is for these sites to be taken down and their hosts prosecuted. But this takes time, particularly as most of these sites are hosted overseas. "Rapid blacklisting means that the damage these sites can do can be more quickly reduced whilst takedown and prosecution processes are pursued, usually overseas," Abetz said. Privacy groups have already criticized the legislation as an attack on free speech. "This government's extremism has reached new heights today," said the chair of the Australian Privacy Foundation, Roger Clarke. "How can a politician claim the right to hold office if they set out to undermine the critical democratic right of freedom of speech, and blatantly decline to evaluate the impact of measures put before the Parliament?" Jo Best of ZDNet Australia reported from Sydney.
| |||||||
