Strange bedfellows: Sex and IT unite to stop Net censorship
- 14 January, 2009 11:15
- Comments 2
The Australian Sex Party's Fiona Patten
Who would have thought the government's proposed Internet filtering scheme would bring together so many disparate groups all united in their opposition to mandatory censorship?
The newly-formed Australian Sex Party, for example, has come out and blasted the idea of Internet filtering, putting itself on the same side as the entire tech industry — from networking vendors to ISPs.
Sex Party leader Fiona Patten believes the government is already backing down on its original promises and is shifting the focus of what type of content will be filtered — a significant concern for all who are seeking more transparency.
“In meetings I had with Senator Conroy last year he indicated that they had no intention of banning non-violent erotica or X-rated material,” Patten said. “But that is not the case — the ACMA Web site lists the types of material that will 'qualify' for the blacklist. This includes material that would be rated X (18+).
According to the Sex Party, there is a clear distinction between X-rated (18+) content, which can be legally traded on DVDs, and child pornography and sexual violence, and the government should not attempt to lump them together in one blacklist.
“They also state that the blacklist will only contain 10,000 sites. One wonders how they will choose from the millions of sexually explicit sites out there,” Patten said.
As for child pornography that is already deemed illegal, the Sex Party believes the filter will not reduce the amount of child abuse material out there because it is generally only available via P2P networks.
“I would like to see them spending more of their resources on catching the bastards that are creating this material,” Patten said.
So great is the opposition to the idea of content filtering that organised street protests have already popped up around the country, uniting unlikely groups of people for a common cause.
The initial Sydney protest attracted a “wide range of people”, including those from the gay and lesbian community, the Scarlet Alliance (the national sex worker alliance) and organisations like the EFA.
A number of political organisations were also involved — including the Greens, the Democrats and the Liberty and Democracy Party.
“When you read the blogs and comments on the major newspaper Web sites you realise the incredibly diverse range of people who are opposed to government's filtering [or] censoring the Internet,” Patten said.
The Sex Party also has a vested interest in not seeing the clean feed go through because it's own Web site might be censored in the second tier, or opt-out, filter.
“This would be tantamount to the censoring of political speech [and] we would definitely be fighting that,” she said. “Also, when you consider that this law makes what is legal in one format (magazines and films) and illegal in another I think there would be a trade practices argument that we would follow up.”
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
- The Pathways ICT Leadership Development Program Brochure and Curriculum 2012
- Becoming a Social Business
- CommVault Extends its Data Protection and Information Management Strategy with Simpana 9
- NetScaler 2048-bit SSL performance advantage
- Staying Secure and Preventing Data Leaks in a Cloud-obsessed World
-
VOIP a wake-up call for global phone competition
-
CeBIT 2012: Will NBN speed up freight delivery times?
-
HTC announces Titan 4G
-
Pure Storage's next-generation flash array offers high-availability option
-
Privacy Act changes finally introduced to parliament
-
Windows 7 for Seniors for Dummies®
-
Excel 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Teach Yourself Visually Windows 7
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Windows 7 for Dummies® Dvd+book Bundle
-
Microsoft Office
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
Comments
chemicalrefugee
Conroy/web questions & consequences
I am uncertain if the point of all of this is to:
1) REALLY do the censorship deed
2) or to prove it cannot be effectively done so people will all forget the idea
3) or to throw a bone to the radical right to whow that the Labor party "IS SERIOUS ABOUT PORN" and then say "sorry, we couldn't do it" (like Howard did again and again to get their votes)
4) or to distract the public with a non-issue.
5) or to get rid of Conroy by giving him enough rope to hang himself with
Regardless the whole thing has been lie after lie by Conroy, and has mostly served to get a lot of people very angry.
Just remember folks, if they really did do this, there are some huge companies that have a coalition that is dedicated to use ANY means to combat internet censorship. These are the very people who give Australia its physical internet equipment and its link to the world. How popular would Rudd or Conroy be if we woke up 2 years from now to a world where no Australian could use GOOGLE or YAHOO (or by a Cisco router or switch); a world where GOOGLE & YAHOO do not list any Aussie sites? That is the kind of thing we face if they are stupid enough to do this.
Anonymous
I still believe "OPT IN" internet filtering is a great idea and there is obligation for all ISPs to provide such a service.
As to the Australian Sex Party, what an odd-ball organisation. They have a policy to:
"Abolish sex slavery and sexual servitude by introducing non morality-based immigration policies that allow bona-fide sex workers to work legally in Australia."
Then have the nerve to state "Develop global approaches to tackling child pornography which focus on production of the material rather than its distribution."
Is there not a morality issue here? You can't have it both ways ASP! Either morality is a part of life and policy OR you can't suggest child pornography material needs to be "tackled".
What worries me is that they don't have a strong "anti-child pornography" stance. If they had their way of leaving morality at the door, where would this stop? It's possible that the slippery slope could result in the acceptance of child-porn.
Post new comment