There have been some recent developments in New Zealand and the United States regarding proposals to take action against copyright infringers through graduated response schemes.
In New Zealand, following a failure to reach agreement regarding a Code of Practice which would have set the policies and procedures for the disconnection of account holders, the Government has decided not to implement the controversial s92A provision. The Government has stated an intention to review the introduction of the scheme and will consider amending the legislation to address concerns about its implementation.
In recent days reports from the United States suggest that Comcast, AT&T and Cox are all in the process of commencing a system whereby copyright infringers are notified that their activities have been detected. Verizon is the only major ISP to categorically state that they are not taking part. Whilst Comcast and AT&T have suggested that this is merely an educative mechanism that involves no penalties and no account terminations, Cox have stated that they have disconnected a small number of offenders as part of their scheme but that it is merely an extension of a system that had already been introduced. There are conflicting reports as to whether these developments are part of an agreement with the RIAA or simply steps the ISPs are taking on their own with no major announcement from either party to date.
Further Reading:
OpenContentAustralia, 3 Strikes. You’rree OUT! (1 February 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/02/3-strikes-yourree-out.html> at 29 March 2009
OpenContentAustralia, NZ Delays Guilt Upon Accusation (25 February 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/02/nz-delays-guilt-upon-accusation.html> at 29 March 2009
ArsTechnica, "3 strikes" strikes out in NZ as government yanks law (23 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/3-strikes-strikes-out-in-nz-as-government-yanks-law.ars> at 29 March 2009
ZeroPaid, New Zealand Scraps “Three-Strikes” Law - For Now (25 March 2009) <http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zeropaid/~3/omF46abE95Y/> at 29 March 2009
TechDirt, New Zealand Dumps 3 Strikes Plan... For Now (24 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090323/1311354215.shtml> at 29 March 2009
The Register, Kiwis scrap 'three strikes' P2P policy (24 March 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/24/new_zealand_delays_three_strikes_policy/> at 26 March 2009
Digital Music News, Three Strikes Gets Struck In New Zealand... (23 March 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032909nz> at 25 March 2009
CNet News, AT&T first to test RIAA antipiracy plan (24 March 2009) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10203799-93.html> at 26 March 2009
Digital Music News, AT&T Clarifies: No Takedowns, No Three-Strikes... (26 March 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032509att> at 29 March 2009
TechDirt, AT&T And Comcast's Non-Denial Denial Of Three Strikes (26 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090326/1309454265.shtml> at 29 March 2009
ZeroPaid, AT&T Begins Helping RIAA Fight P2P (26 March 2009) <http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zeropaid/~3/2D_rwQcJMCM/> at 29 March 2009
ArsTechnica, AT&T tests RIAA P2P program, but refuses to sanction users (25 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/att-joins-riaa-program-but-refuses-to-sanction-users.ars> at 29 March 2009
CNet News, AT&T exec: ISP will never terminate service on RIAA's word (25 March 2009) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10204514-93.html> at 29 March 2009
TechDirt, ISPs Testing RIAA's 3 Strikes Program (25 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090325/0933064249.shtml> at 29 March 2009
Digital Music News, RIAA Responds: We're Making Important Progress... (26 March 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032509riaa> at 29 March 2009
CNet News, Comcast, Cox cooperating with RIAA in antipiracy campaign (25 March 2009) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10204047-93.html> at 29 March 2009
Digital Music News, But Wait: Cox Suspending 'Tiny Fraction' of Users... (27 March 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032609cox> at 29 March 2009
Digital Music News, Comcast Responds: No Three-Strikes, 'Nothing Has Changed'... (27 March 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032609comcast> at 29 March 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Conroy Filibuster
I watched the ABC show Q&A tonight in which Senator Stephen Conroy responded to questions regarding the proposed internet filtering scheme in Australia. Over 2,000 questions were submitted by members of the public.
He spoke very slowly and very carefully selected words when addressing the issues raised. He repeated himself a lot and appeared to deliberately stretch out answers to limit the extent of the discussion.
The central points of his argument were that the first blacklist leaked contained 700 more sites that the true list and was did not accurately depict the sites that are currently blocked. He stated that the second list that has been leaked was closer to the real list. The current system by which sites are refused classification and are blocked has been in place for 9 years and was introduced by the Howard Government. While stating that the list is updated every couple of months to remove outdated links and add new ones he also stated that the list has not been changed since the Labour Government was voted into office. When asked if the government could publish the list in the future he stated that this would defeat the purpose of having it in the first place - seemingly missing the point that none of us would be able to access it anyway.
In response to recent reports that a Dentists surgery was on the list he advised that the site had been hijacked by the Russian mob and that the site had been blocked internationally due to the inclusion of refused classified material on it - he stated that it had never been blocked from Australia. He did note that one site had been incorrectly blocked despite being classified as PG (parental guidance) advising that this was a 'technical error' and that ACMA were going through the list tonight to ensure that other sites had not been accidentally included.
He acknowledged that the filter will not address the distribution of material on file sharing networks, did not have a chance to respond to the suggestion that sites like Facebook pose a greater threat to children nor did he reply to suggestions that keeping the sites online and using them to trace and prosecute offenders was a preferrable option. There was also insufficient discussion of the need for parents to monitor children's net usage and no comment on the fact that only 35,000 Australian's have downloaded and installed NetNanny and other approved home based filtering technology.
Overall he came off as being poorly spoken and unconvincing. However having said that the show itself was not really capable of delivering a considered debate with a sensationalistic approach that did not give enough time to answer each question, overlooked important points raised by members of the public and overall proved to be a poor forum to debate such a detailed and contentious issue.
The show is available to be streamed on the ABC website here.
He spoke very slowly and very carefully selected words when addressing the issues raised. He repeated himself a lot and appeared to deliberately stretch out answers to limit the extent of the discussion.
The central points of his argument were that the first blacklist leaked contained 700 more sites that the true list and was did not accurately depict the sites that are currently blocked. He stated that the second list that has been leaked was closer to the real list. The current system by which sites are refused classification and are blocked has been in place for 9 years and was introduced by the Howard Government. While stating that the list is updated every couple of months to remove outdated links and add new ones he also stated that the list has not been changed since the Labour Government was voted into office. When asked if the government could publish the list in the future he stated that this would defeat the purpose of having it in the first place - seemingly missing the point that none of us would be able to access it anyway.
In response to recent reports that a Dentists surgery was on the list he advised that the site had been hijacked by the Russian mob and that the site had been blocked internationally due to the inclusion of refused classified material on it - he stated that it had never been blocked from Australia. He did note that one site had been incorrectly blocked despite being classified as PG (parental guidance) advising that this was a 'technical error' and that ACMA were going through the list tonight to ensure that other sites had not been accidentally included.
He acknowledged that the filter will not address the distribution of material on file sharing networks, did not have a chance to respond to the suggestion that sites like Facebook pose a greater threat to children nor did he reply to suggestions that keeping the sites online and using them to trace and prosecute offenders was a preferrable option. There was also insufficient discussion of the need for parents to monitor children's net usage and no comment on the fact that only 35,000 Australian's have downloaded and installed NetNanny and other approved home based filtering technology.
Overall he came off as being poorly spoken and unconvincing. However having said that the show itself was not really capable of delivering a considered debate with a sensationalistic approach that did not give enough time to answer each question, overlooked important points raised by members of the public and overall proved to be a poor forum to debate such a detailed and contentious issue.
The show is available to be streamed on the ABC website here.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Get Up - Censor This!
I was sitting here only a few minutes ago checking that my last post on the FMC DC Policy Day had published properly when I noticed that the Get Up petition on the left had side of the screen was nearing 100,000 signatures. I excitedly thought that reaching that milestone would be a great opportunity to write another post about the proposed filtering regime for Australia.
Having thought that, I then turned to check my email and low and behold there is a message from Get Up about something even more interesting - they are looking for OUR ideas to write a new television campaign against the Governments scheme. Their current web ad has been viewed more than 3.5 million times.
They state:
As a people-powered movement, we understand that the internet isn't about control and censorship - it's about collaboration. That's why we're pooling the creativity of the GetUp community to create a TV ad, which will air on national television.
Having thought that, I then turned to check my email and low and behold there is a message from Get Up about something even more interesting - they are looking for OUR ideas to write a new television campaign against the Governments scheme. Their current web ad has been viewed more than 3.5 million times.
They state:
As a people-powered movement, we understand that the internet isn't about control and censorship - it's about collaboration. That's why we're pooling the creativity of the GetUp community to create a TV ad, which will air on national television.
We'll turn your idea into a professional TV ad that will be seen by millions of Australians.
What can you contribute? Creative script ideas, music, images, personal anecdotes, or even a video. We're also looking for offers of help from professional voice-over and acting talent.
Simply submit your idea by email to censorthis@getup.org.au by next Sunday, March 29.
Get to it Australia - the web needs our help!
FMC: Win-Win When? Copyright and Innovation in the Digital Age
I am a big fan of the US organisation called the Future of Music Coalition. They are an artist focused association that lobby the US government and industry for changes to laws and practices that promote musicians welfare. They have been vocal supporters of Network Neutrality, payments for recording artists for terrestrial radio air play and frequently run conferences on topical issues.
Recently I viewed the panel discussion from their DC Policy Day held on 11 February 2009. The speakers were:
Rick Carnes President, Songwriters Guild of America
David Carson General Counsel, US Copyright Office
Zahavah Levine Chief Counsel, YouTube
Steve Marks Executive VP and General Counsel, RIAA
Hal Ponder Director of Government Relations, American Federation of Musicians
Gigi Sohn President, Public Knowledge
Walter McDonough General Counsel, Future of Music Coalition (moderator)
I was particularly interested to hear of the intentions of the new administration with respect to the role of the Copyright Czar, the potential to revisit the DMCA and the possibility of copyright reform with respect to sampling.
The close relationship and the campaign contributions made by the content industry to the Democratic Party was one point raised by Gigi Sohn, as was the need to be careful in making senior appointments to the new government. Discussion also turned to the policy reasons behind the inclusion of broadband infrastructure in the stimulus package.
Zahavah Levine agreed with the panel that the current priorities of the administration may make it difficult to get much needed copyright reform, which for YouTube focuses largely on the difficulties in gaining publishing licenses for people to use sound recordings in their personal videos that are uploaded. The difficulties lie largely in locating the owners of the rights, the multiplicity of rights that apply and the lack of legislative clarity on fair use, with the best solution being the blanket licensing of these rights.
Hal Ponder speaks of the move to introduce terrestrial radio performance rights and notes the sliding scale of royalty payments designed to reduce the burden on small radio stations because of their importance in ensuring that niche artists retain access to public broadcasting.
I laugh at Steve Marks suggestion that the RIAA's approach is always balanced.
Take a look for yourself:
The clip goes for around 1.5hrs.
More Information
Future of Music Coalition <http://www.futureofmusic.org/> 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, DC Policy Day 2009 (11 February 2009) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/events/dcpolicyday09/schedule.cfm> 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, Network Neutrality Fact Sheet (May 2008) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/articles/NNfactsheet.cfm> at 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, Fact Sheet Public Performance Rights for Sound Recordings <http://www.futureofmusic.org/articles/pprsrfactsheet.cfm> (March 2008) at 20 March 2009
Recently I viewed the panel discussion from their DC Policy Day held on 11 February 2009. The speakers were:
Rick Carnes President, Songwriters Guild of America
David Carson General Counsel, US Copyright Office
Zahavah Levine Chief Counsel, YouTube
Steve Marks Executive VP and General Counsel, RIAA
Hal Ponder Director of Government Relations, American Federation of Musicians
Gigi Sohn President, Public Knowledge
Walter McDonough General Counsel, Future of Music Coalition (moderator)
I was particularly interested to hear of the intentions of the new administration with respect to the role of the Copyright Czar, the potential to revisit the DMCA and the possibility of copyright reform with respect to sampling.
The close relationship and the campaign contributions made by the content industry to the Democratic Party was one point raised by Gigi Sohn, as was the need to be careful in making senior appointments to the new government. Discussion also turned to the policy reasons behind the inclusion of broadband infrastructure in the stimulus package.
Zahavah Levine agreed with the panel that the current priorities of the administration may make it difficult to get much needed copyright reform, which for YouTube focuses largely on the difficulties in gaining publishing licenses for people to use sound recordings in their personal videos that are uploaded. The difficulties lie largely in locating the owners of the rights, the multiplicity of rights that apply and the lack of legislative clarity on fair use, with the best solution being the blanket licensing of these rights.
Hal Ponder speaks of the move to introduce terrestrial radio performance rights and notes the sliding scale of royalty payments designed to reduce the burden on small radio stations because of their importance in ensuring that niche artists retain access to public broadcasting.
I laugh at Steve Marks suggestion that the RIAA's approach is always balanced.
Take a look for yourself:
The clip goes for around 1.5hrs.
More Information
Future of Music Coalition <http://www.futureofmusic.org/> 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, DC Policy Day 2009 (11 February 2009) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/events/dcpolicyday09/schedule.cfm> 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, Network Neutrality Fact Sheet (May 2008) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/articles/NNfactsheet.cfm> at 20 March 2009
Future of Music Coalition, Fact Sheet Public Performance Rights for Sound Recordings <http://www.futureofmusic.org/articles/pprsrfactsheet.cfm> (March 2008) at 20 March 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Choruss - Jim Griffin
Check out the slide show by Jim Griffin regarding the proposed licensing scheme for file sharing on college campuses in the USA.
The intention is to implement a voluntary licensing scheme which does not required amendments to copyright law nor government intervention. Similarly Griffin does not propose that the fees paid for legal downloading should be applied on a compulsory basis, rather intending to offer opt-in, opt-out and all-in options. However, Choruss's focus is not solely on the legalisation of p2p file sharing - Griffin refers to this as a mere side effect - the aim of the proposal is to ensure monetisation of the digital music industry which includes other digital architectures in addition to p2p.
Interestingly he notes that in introducing a voluntary collective licensing scheme that mathematical perfection is impossible but that a reasonably fair division of funds can take place.
He states that it would be impossible, short of a compulsory license, for Choruss to prevent all future DMCA notices - partially because it will only apply to audio and also because it will only concern artists and labels that have agreed to cooperate. Major record labels are said to be negotiating however not all arists or labels will sign up to the scheme. They hope to have a test in place from Fall 2009 to Fall 2010.
Developments in technology mean that it is now far easier to count and compensate for the sharing of music than to filter exchanges and prevent it. Griffin concludes by noting that 'control' should not be the ultimate aim of the music industry.
While admirable in intention, as usual, there seems to be more questions than answers (check out the chat forum on the side of the slide show). The presentation goes for 1 hour.
Further Reading
Educause, Choruss: A New Business Model for Digital Music (3 March 2009) <https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a729300474/p72627963/> at 14 March 2009
The intention is to implement a voluntary licensing scheme which does not required amendments to copyright law nor government intervention. Similarly Griffin does not propose that the fees paid for legal downloading should be applied on a compulsory basis, rather intending to offer opt-in, opt-out and all-in options. However, Choruss's focus is not solely on the legalisation of p2p file sharing - Griffin refers to this as a mere side effect - the aim of the proposal is to ensure monetisation of the digital music industry which includes other digital architectures in addition to p2p.
Interestingly he notes that in introducing a voluntary collective licensing scheme that mathematical perfection is impossible but that a reasonably fair division of funds can take place.
He states that it would be impossible, short of a compulsory license, for Choruss to prevent all future DMCA notices - partially because it will only apply to audio and also because it will only concern artists and labels that have agreed to cooperate. Major record labels are said to be negotiating however not all arists or labels will sign up to the scheme. They hope to have a test in place from Fall 2009 to Fall 2010.
Developments in technology mean that it is now far easier to count and compensate for the sharing of music than to filter exchanges and prevent it. Griffin concludes by noting that 'control' should not be the ultimate aim of the music industry.
While admirable in intention, as usual, there seems to be more questions than answers (check out the chat forum on the side of the slide show). The presentation goes for 1 hour.
Further Reading
Educause, Choruss: A New Business Model for Digital Music (3 March 2009) <https://admin.na3.acrobat.com/_a729300474/p72627963/> at 14 March 2009
ARIA 2008 Sales Figures
There was little surprise in the release of the annual wholesale sales figures of recorded music in Australia this week. In total, physical album sales declined 12% (to $341.7m) over the past 12 months. While ARIA appear to be playing up the increase in digital sales - 35.6% (to $54.1m) there remains an overall loss of 7.91%. This is despite a 6 week period in late 2008 when there was a sudden increase in purchases due to the release of a number of popular bands albums around the same time (no doubt to enable pre Christmas purchasing).
The ARIA press release also indicates that the industry is not expecting a great change in consumer behaviour due to the economic crisis - I for one doubt this will be the case - as people's financial situations deteriorate and money needs to be kept aside for basic living expenses, there is more likely to be a move toward more cost effective means of acquiring music.
The press relase is worth reading just to note the spin doctoring.
Further Reading
ARIA, 2008 ARIA Yearly Statistics (March 2009) <http://www.aria.com.au/documents/YE12-08.pdf> at 14 March 2009
ARIA, ARIA releases 2008 wholesale sales figures (11 March 2o09) <http://www.aria.com.au/2008SalesFigures.htm> at 14 March 2009
The ARIA press release also indicates that the industry is not expecting a great change in consumer behaviour due to the economic crisis - I for one doubt this will be the case - as people's financial situations deteriorate and money needs to be kept aside for basic living expenses, there is more likely to be a move toward more cost effective means of acquiring music.
The press relase is worth reading just to note the spin doctoring.
Further Reading
ARIA, 2008 ARIA Yearly Statistics (March 2009) <http://www.aria.com.au/documents/YE12-08.pdf> at 14 March 2009
ARIA, ARIA releases 2008 wholesale sales figures (11 March 2o09) <http://www.aria.com.au/2008SalesFigures.htm> at 14 March 2009
International Women's Day
I was lucky to attend a luncheon this week celebrating International Women's Day. The theme for this year was Women in Education and it was very interesting to hear speeches from staff members and students who discussed their experiences. A common theme was the increased opportunities education offers women.
Law and IT are both fields which have often been considered male dominated.
In law it seems that while the majority of graduates are females and they are often recruited to large firms, there are significant impediments to them being promoted to be partners. Furthermore, many women leave the profession altogether - a recent article in the Australian 'lawyer 2b' magazine reports that the Women Lawyers Association of NSW are currently preparing to undertake extensive research to determine why it is that so many women leave - no doubt the lack of flexible work hours and workplace culture play a major part in their decision.
In IT there has been far less participation by women at the university level and as a result fewer graduates and a lower level of participation in the workforce. In the UK IT industry it has been suggested that women are, on average, paid 23% less than their male counterparts and participation has dropped from 21% to 16%, with similar issues across the EU.
It seems that while education is clearly a key part to creating the conditions for women to succeed, there is a lot of work to do in both of these fields to ensure equal participation and prosperity.
Further Reading
ABC News, Protests mark International Women's Day (9 March 2009) <http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/09/2511107.htm?section=justin> at 14 March 2009
Women Lawyers Association of NSW <http://www.womenlawyersnsw.org.au/index.asp?ID=12> at 14 March 2009
The Register, UK IT should 'fire men first', says Kate Craig-Wood (10 March 2009)
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/10/craig_wood_in_fire_blokes_call/> at 14 March 2009
The Register, IT industry needs more women <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/06/women_it_eu_job_shortage/> at 14 March 2009
Law and IT are both fields which have often been considered male dominated.
In law it seems that while the majority of graduates are females and they are often recruited to large firms, there are significant impediments to them being promoted to be partners. Furthermore, many women leave the profession altogether - a recent article in the Australian 'lawyer 2b' magazine reports that the Women Lawyers Association of NSW are currently preparing to undertake extensive research to determine why it is that so many women leave - no doubt the lack of flexible work hours and workplace culture play a major part in their decision.
In IT there has been far less participation by women at the university level and as a result fewer graduates and a lower level of participation in the workforce. In the UK IT industry it has been suggested that women are, on average, paid 23% less than their male counterparts and participation has dropped from 21% to 16%, with similar issues across the EU.
It seems that while education is clearly a key part to creating the conditions for women to succeed, there is a lot of work to do in both of these fields to ensure equal participation and prosperity.
Further Reading
ABC News, Protests mark International Women's Day (9 March 2009) <http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/09/2511107.htm?section=justin> at 14 March 2009
Women Lawyers Association of NSW <http://www.womenlawyersnsw.org.au/index.asp?ID=12> at 14 March 2009
The Register, UK IT should 'fire men first', says Kate Craig-Wood (10 March 2009)
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/10/craig_wood_in_fire_blokes_call/> at 14 March 2009
The Register, IT industry needs more women <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/06/women_it_eu_job_shortage/> at 14 March 2009
Monday, March 2, 2009
Oz Filtering Fizzes Out?
Recent reports suggest that the Australian Government's plan for ISP based internet filtering may never come to fruition. Independent Senator Nick Xenophon has now stated that he will oppose any legislation that the Government introduces because the filtering proposal may have unintended negative consequences. Originally in favour of the program due to concerns about online gambling, Senator Xenophon now looks set to vote with the Greens against its introduction stating that the money could be better spent elsewhere. The Senator has suggested that there should be a greater effort to educate parents.
A recent survey conducted by Galaxy on behalf of Get Up suggested only 5% of Australians are in favour of the proposed filtering and only 4% think the Government should have control over the information available to users of the internet. In another survey conducted by Netspace 61% of Australians were strongly opposed to the filtering scheme with only 6.3% in favour.
The Australian Communitcation and Media Authority's blacklist is reported to currently contain 1370 sites, of which only 674 relate to depictions of children under 18. An additional 506 sites classified R18+ and X18+ would be blocked under the scheme with the Government looking to expand this to another 10,000 webpages to include sites "depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or 'revolting and abhorrent phenomena' that 'offend against the standards of morality'".
This is certainly encouraging news but as is often the case in the world of politics, nothing is certain until the votes have been cast. In recent weeks Senator Xenophon has used his position as the holder of the balance of power in the Senate to force changes to the Government's financial stimulus package and it is not beyond possibility that another round of legislative bargaining may begin with the filtering proposal. We will just have to wait and see how this unfolds over the coming months - in the meantime the Government is continuing with the filtering trials.
Earlier posts I have written on the filtering scheme can be found here and here and here. If you haven't already done so, please sign the GetUp online petition which is available on the left hand side of my weblog and which currently has 97,824 signatures.
Further Reading
ZeroPaid, Aussie Internet Censorship Plans Scuttled (27 February 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/10033/Aussie+Internet+Censorship+Plans+Scuttled> at 1 March 2009
ArsTechnica, Key backer's change of heart endangers Aussie 'Net filtering (26 February 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/02/key-backers-change-of-heart-endangers-aussie-net-filtering.ars> at 27 February 2009
Sydney Morning Herald, Web censorship plan heads towards a dead end (26 February 2009) <http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/02/26/1235237810486.html> at 27 February 2009
A recent survey conducted by Galaxy on behalf of Get Up suggested only 5% of Australians are in favour of the proposed filtering and only 4% think the Government should have control over the information available to users of the internet. In another survey conducted by Netspace 61% of Australians were strongly opposed to the filtering scheme with only 6.3% in favour.
The Australian Communitcation and Media Authority's blacklist is reported to currently contain 1370 sites, of which only 674 relate to depictions of children under 18. An additional 506 sites classified R18+ and X18+ would be blocked under the scheme with the Government looking to expand this to another 10,000 webpages to include sites "depicting drug use, crime, sex, cruelty, violence or 'revolting and abhorrent phenomena' that 'offend against the standards of morality'".
This is certainly encouraging news but as is often the case in the world of politics, nothing is certain until the votes have been cast. In recent weeks Senator Xenophon has used his position as the holder of the balance of power in the Senate to force changes to the Government's financial stimulus package and it is not beyond possibility that another round of legislative bargaining may begin with the filtering proposal. We will just have to wait and see how this unfolds over the coming months - in the meantime the Government is continuing with the filtering trials.
Earlier posts I have written on the filtering scheme can be found here and here and here. If you haven't already done so, please sign the GetUp online petition which is available on the left hand side of my weblog and which currently has 97,824 signatures.
Further Reading
ZeroPaid, Aussie Internet Censorship Plans Scuttled (27 February 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/10033/Aussie+Internet+Censorship+Plans+Scuttled> at 1 March 2009
ArsTechnica, Key backer's change of heart endangers Aussie 'Net filtering (26 February 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/02/key-backers-change-of-heart-endangers-aussie-net-filtering.ars> at 27 February 2009
Sydney Morning Herald, Web censorship plan heads towards a dead end (26 February 2009) <http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/02/26/1235237810486.html> at 27 February 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
