Anti-Censorship protest

[excal]

THE DETAILS

Location: TBC
Date:   Saturday, 30 January 2010
Time:   12:00 - 15:00


The Australian Federal Government is pushing forward with a plan to force Internet Service Providers [ISPs] to censor the Internet for all Australians. This plan will waste tens of millions of taxpayer dollars and slow down Internet access.

You will not be able to Opt-Out of this filter, as was previously claimed.

Despite being almost universally condemned by the public, ISPs, State Governments, Media and censorship experts, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is determined to force this filter into your home.

What do we know so far?

* Filtering will be mandatory in all homes and schools across the country.
* The clean feed will censor material that is "harmful and inappropriate" for children.
*All "fetish" pornography will be blocked.
*All games intended for people over the age of 18 will be blocked.
* The filter will require a massive expansion of the ACMA's blacklist of prohibited content.
* The Government wants to use dynamic filters of questionable accuracy that slow the internet down by an average of 30%.
* The filtering will target legal as well as illegal material.
* $44m has been budgeted for the implementation of this scheme so far.
* The clean-feed for children will be opt-out, but a second filter will be mandatory for all Internet users.
* A live pilot deployment is going ahead in the near future.

What we don't know is just as important.

* What age level is the country's Internet to be made appropriate for? 15? 10? 5 years old?
* Who decides what material is "appropriate" for Australians to see?
* How are lists of "illegal" material compiled?
* Who will maintain the blacklist of prohibited sites?
* How can sites mistakenly added to the list be removed?
* Why can't we, as Adults, choose what we want to see?

All of us want to see children protected from content that could be disturbing or harmful. The clean-feed filter is not a good way to go about this, and could actually reduce the safety of children online.

Website: http://www.blockthefilter.org
Victorian division: http://www.nocensorshipvictoria.org/

Facebook event is here: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=200213317223

[excal]

I'm also curious to know what people think about the filter in general, so feel free to pipe up!

[enwiabe]

excal, put venue/date/time in bold at the top

I will be there for sure.

This is madness beyond belief. There's an even more stunning opinion piece here which really opens your eyes to what's going on:

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/163063,commentary-why-we-dont-need-a-filter.aspx

[xXNovaxX]

Please don't hurt me

I am risking karma to voice this =(

But I am happy with like 90% of the idea.....

If it stops children from viewing sex....why not?
Games which are R+ etc and are illegal ANYWAY in australia....why not
Fetish pornography.....why not, some of the stuff is weird man (if kids are protected and stuff, and it can discourage the "trend")

HOWEVER, I do not like the idea of it being compulsory, and it adds on to the thread I made, where the Gov is having MORE control over our lives.

In regards to the cost, I don't really care/mind, the Government has BILLIONS, a few million doesn't equate to much (remember the $44 BILLION broadband network)

I think the issue is, the Government is keeping too much secret and so RIGHTFULLY we should suspect them.

In regards to slowing down the internet, the company behind it recently said they have a technology which does nto AFFECT speeds at all.....and even if it did slow it down a TAD, we're going to be getting fibre optic, and most people have ADSL now anyway....

=( Don't hate me

[EvangelionZeta]

I think that in terms of principles, this filter plan is a-ok.  Despite the filter probably affecting some of the websites I visit (?), on the whole there's enough research to suggest that excessive violence and particularly degrading pornography isn't helpful at all for a society.  At this stage, I'm still in favour of the filter; once it's in practice, however, things may change (depending on what actually does get blocked and whether or not the internet does in fact become far slower).

[xXNovaxX]

Wait....I go back on my argument....

I just can't stand Big Brother, internet filter for the "safety of children" NOW

Internet filter for "bagging the Government, for knowing info about the Government" LATER

Just you watch, it's like China during the Olympics, when it blocked google, facebook etc.
And like Iran and the "Twitter"war" when the election was rigged

Like I am FOR it in general, kids these days are being exposed to so much FILTH, but I don't see why it has to be MANDATORY, since when does the Government care more about OUR kids, then their FAMILY.

I just know one day the Government will take advantage of the filter.

Does anyone know what broguht this change? Why isn't the Govenrment happy with EXISTING filters such as "Net Nanny", and didnt John Howard introduce FREE filters for parents if they want?

[/0]

I thought this was quite interesting, from enwiabe's link

They went on: "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." Google reminds us that being homosexual was a crime in Tasmania until 1997, and information about it could have been (and was) Refused Classification, ripe for banning by Conroy's rabbit-proof firewall.

[GerrySly]

Like I am FOR it in general, kids these days are being exposed to so much FILTH, but I don't see why it has to be MANDATORY, since when does the Government care more about OUR kids, then their FAMILY.

I just know one day the Government will take advantage of the filter.

Sure blocking kids from filth is good but isn't that more of a family issue not a government issue? What about other issues that are equally as important if not more important? Things such as chat rooms, stalking etc. is this going to block entire protocols as well?

Word on the street is nobody gets to see what sites are blocked so from the get go we got no idea what is blocked and what isn't.

[xXNovaxX]

Did any1 see the BLACKLIST? It leaked earlier this year, I read some of the blocked sites on the Herald Sun ><
And I agree with you Gerrysly

It's also "convenient" the Gov introduces this...it's the one thing they don't have control over...the internet

[EvangelionZeta]

I guess it all comes down to how responsible we feel the government is.  My advocating the filter is only if it is utilised strictly to remove harmful content; if the Australian government starts banning anti-Rudd websites or something, then we've got a problem.

[ninwa]

If it stops children from viewing sex....why not?

Because it is not the best way to prevent children from viewing it. Protecting children from explicit adult content should start in the home. The government is taking over the role of parents.
Anyway, isn't normal pornography allowed past the filters? (not sure on this)

Games which are R+ etc and are illegal ANYWAY in australia....why not

Most (?) of those games are R because they are overly violent / contain too many drug references etc... whereas a lot of the stuff on the blacklist is of a sexual nature.

Fetish pornography.....why not, some of the stuff is weird man (if kids are protected and stuff, and it can discourage the "trend")

Because it is infringing on the liberties of those who may be into those fetishes. As long as it's not hurting anyone else, they should be free to indulge, no matter how "weird" you (or anyone else) think they are.

And who decides what constitutes a "fetish"? This is a dangerous line of thought... it leads to cases like R v Brown, where the English House of Lords ruled that a group of homosexual men practicing sado-masochistic sex, in the privacy of their own home, with full consent from each member, were still committing criminal assault. It was frightening to read their judgments and see how much their own personal prejudices influenced their decisions. This was a 1993 (OVER 15 years ago!!) decision which was widely condemned; yet the personal prejudices of those in government are now similarly affecting how everyone else in Australia lives.

[methodsboy]

I seriously think that censorship should have occured ages ago. - Children, as young as 5, are accessing the internet and god knows what sites. This push will end child corruption and restore much needed closure. I would like to ask all of you this question: how embarrassing is it when you're showing something to your parents and some picture with a naked person comes up due to advertising?

[/0]

I guess it all comes down to how responsible we feel the government is.  My advocating the filter is only if it is utilised strictly to remove harmful content; if the Australian government starts banning anti-Rudd websites or something, then we've got a problem.

I wouldn't trust any government to control information. As history has shown, there will always be corruption.

[ninwa]

Children, as young as 5, are accessing the internet and god knows what sites.

That is the fault of some parents. Should every Australian be punished for the negligence of a minority?

This push will end child corruption and restore much needed closure.

1) How?
2) What is child corruption? Do you mean child exploitation?

I would like to ask all of you this question: how embarrassing is it when you're showing something to your parents and some picture with a naked person comes up due to advertising?

That has never happened to me. So now the personal liberties of Australians must be restricted because some people get... embarrassed occasionally?

[/0]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/spoof-conroy-website-protests-at-internet-filter-plan-20091218-l1bn.html

A net prankster has taken advantage of Conroy's failure to reserve his own domain name by registering stephenconroy.com.au and turning it into an anti-censorship protest site.

I can't access stephenconroy.com.au...

Did they... shut it down?

Note that this article was written only 2 days ago