EFA claims 100 signatures an hour in filter petition

Petition will be the first submitted to parliament for consideration

The EFA is claiming 100 people an hour are signing up to its online petition against the government's ISP-level internet content filter

The EFA is claiming 100 people an hour are signing up to its online petition against the government's ISP-level internet content filter

Supporters are claiming one hundred people an hour are signing onto a petition aiming to stop the roll out of the Federal Government’s ISP-level Internet content filter.

The petition, drafted by the man hired as a campaign organiser for the Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), lawyer Peter Black, will be the first submitted to parliament for consideration.

Black said the action is the first step into bringing the content filtering debate to the general public.

“We are hoping to act as a campaign hub of collaboration for the various different opposition groups – we want to open up communication channels and… take debate beyond technology sector to mainstream sectors,” Black said.

“If we can do a good job of explaining that the filter will not address the government’s objectives (of reducing child pornography), we will get widespread opposition in the [general] public.”

However the EFA is keen to distance itself from other protests such as those organised over Facebook for March 6. EFA board member Geordie Guy said the group will focus on collaborating opposition efforts.

(See pictures of last year's protest: Aussies rally against against sanitised Internet)

“The protests don’t have anything to do with us – we help groups obtain protest permits and supply P.A equipment, but we don’t get heavily involved,” Guy said, adding that Black has been charged with formalising the EFA’s position on the filtering scheme over the next few weeks.

He said the petition has gathered more than 1000 signatures since its launch last night. (Read the petition on the EFA website).

“The most important thing about the petition is that it is valid for parliament [as] it has been worded in compliance with Senate Standing Orders… it is not just clicking a button,” Guy said.

The petition will remain online until the Federal Government formalises its content filtering policies, which Black said will not jeopardise its validity in the Senate: “it will be very weighty in parliament”.

Next page: Pollies back online blackout

Tags isp-level internet content filteringefa

More about EFAElectronic Frontiers AustraliaFacebook




FFS Australia put it on a Ballot paper and let Australia decide. Simple cost effective and when the answer is a blatant NO then these money wasting politicians will STFU about it. The last filter cost US the Aussie taxpayer approx $17,000,000 and was cracked by a teenager with 24hrs. LEARN FOM YOUR MISTAKES Australia.



The last filter wasn't cracked, his dad knew no better and left sonny boy with admin rights....

He simply turned it off....



Learn to tell the whole story Australia...

BTW, at 100 signatures an hour, they should have 50,000 signatures in no time.

That is approx. 0.22% of Australians. But let's assume only 12 million Aussies of age, then that makes 0.417% of Australians.

They will need 120,000 signatures to represent 1% of adult age Aussies.

Should not take them too long to get that minimum number. It is easy enough to collect as they are doing it all online.



OG1 I would love to agree with you that putting this to a public vote would be the way to go (referendums are the only close thing i can think of and they never seem to be cost effective) but I think the easiest way to sort this out it just to vote these carnies out at the next election. Bit sad considering all the hope i had for Senior Rudd at the last election but hey, you live and learn. If only they were as keen to get this fibre to the home thing happening. Oh well.



umm what about the 20,000+ signature petition submitted to parliament last year? this is certainly not the first of its kind



A referendum won't help, because it will be couched in the same FUD currently allowing the filter to proceed. The choice on your ballot paper, as you put it, would be:

Do you think we should allow child porn: YES/NO?

The question that we should ask is:

Do you think we should allow governments to block access to websites at their discretion without public oversight: YES/NO?

Do you think we should waste money on an internet filter that can be bypassed by anyone in a matter of seconds: YES/NO?



I think it would be better to slow down access on various sites (ONLY those which do contain illegal material) to such a point that the user get's annoyed at such slow access that they woud likely change their ways. The list should also be made public so that it can be scruitinized.

This then does not impede anyones access rights!

This would still allow for freedom of speech.... only it would be talking very very very very slowly...LOL



Bang go local jobs and Trade Deficit will rise.
And ouch - the embarrasement - oh - you have a China problem too.

If local ISP's dont give 100%, or inferior to oversea's based services - I'll shop and by imported product.

If 5% of the internet population pay $20 month for Swiss based
proxies, encrypted too - for unfiltered whatever - is big money.
The other 5% will pay for offshore download sites .

This 'initiative' will only stop the stupid. The unilateral extension to 'other' material is cowardly. With IP6, and Firefox/Chrome crypto plugins using graphic card GPU's - this temporary 'go' will be useless in 3 years.



Kenneth has accidentally hit on the way the petition should be structured given the simple-minded nature of those likely to read it. If the assumption is that those who don't sign support the opposite opinion. For example, if 120,000 signatures represent 1% of adults who object to the filter, some will assume that the other 99% support it.

Solution - reverse the sense of the question. Get a petition going in support of the filter and assume that those who don't sign are against it. I know that anyone with any intelligence will see through this. Given that anyone with any intelligence wouldn't want to squander millions of dollars on a filter that will take a novice with a simple cheat sheet 5 minutes to bypass, there is little chance of any supporters of the filter seeing through this petition.



There's no point trying to convince the powers that be that the filter won't work or that it can easily be bypassed.

They already know this.

They don't see it as squandering millions on a filter that's doomed to failure, rather it's investing millions of somebody else's money to paint themselves as the saviours of the children in the eyes of the non-cognoscenti and prop up their re-election - and that's a worthy cause if ever they've seen one!

It won't be shown to be an abject failure until after they've been re-elected and then it will be the fault of those nefarious cyber criminals and paedophiles - you just can't trust those types of people, you know...the crims and paedophiles that is...of COURSE we trust our politicians...NO<Internet filter engaged - please move on - nothing to see here>



Everyone listen and keep this quiet. Google has been rumoured to be putting up satellites in space that will give anyone on the planet wireless access to a unfiltered internet. Please remember this is only a rumour but one from a very good source but a rumour just the same. Apparently this project has been going on since 2006 when all the filtering talk started heating up. The pollies will jump on this, after all they don't want to lose their pron either.......Lets see how it all pans out. Rumour is the google thing is almost complete right now.......Fingers crossed.........

Melissa Short


Good News, the submission date for "The Official House of Reps" Petition against this year's forthcoming legislation to implement mandatory internet censorship here in Australia has now been extended, the new submission date for the signatures is now late May, please print it out, sign it and post it back to me in the ...mail before May 19th if you still stand against this.

It can be downloaded from:


If you are in a position to gather others signatures please do so as we certainly need as much support as possible.

Comments are now closed

Intel planning thumb-sized PCs for next year