backtop


Print 54 comment(s) - last by matriarch wolf.. on Feb 27 at 3:06 PM

New rules seek to shield minors and bolster the country’s already strict censorship laws

January 20 will mark an era for Australian Internet content, as sweeping new rules will take affect that enforce mandatory age-verification on mature or adult-oriented web pages and services.

According to a press release from the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), “content service providers” are required to verify and enforce the minimum age of all individuals attempting to access content that is rated according to the Australian classification office’s MA15+ (mature, restricted to age 15 and up) or R18+ (restricted to age 18 and up) ratings.

Telcos are under additional controls as well, as the new rules require age verification by the cell provider on “premium rate SMS or MMS services” and “mobile content portals.”

The new rules come from the Australian government’s Restricted Access System Declaration 2007, which governs “age restricted content” across almost every information medium in Australia. All content, including web pages and mobile phone content, is examined by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) and assigned a rating according to the country’s national ratings system.

Content that is rated above the R18+ rating (namely, X18+ or "refused classification") is banned entirely from the Australian Internet; if that content is found to reside within the country its owner is sent a “takedown notice,” and if content resides outside of Australia it is added to the blacklist on the country’s mandatory Internet censor.

The Declaration makes no mention of how it would handle user-generated content, leaving social networking and similar services in a legal gray area. According to the press release, ACMA will “continue to liaise and consult on these matters” with the industry.

While developing the new rules, ACMA chairman Chris Chapman said that the committee “was guided by its disposition to allow adults to continue to read, hear and see what they want, while protecting children from exposure to inappropriate content,” yet simultaneously acting “conscious of avoiding unnecessary red tape for Australian businesses.”

Australia has long carried a reputation for having one of the most restrictive censorship protocols in the western world. Books, movies, and video games that are rated X18+ (roughly equivalent to AO or NC-17) are heavily restricted in their sale – oftentimes, banned entirely – and content that does not fit into any of the OFLC’s guidelines is banned and blocked from import.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Positive in my mind
By BradCube on 12/26/07, Rating: 0
RE: Positive in my mind
By eye smite on 12/26/2007 7:25:55 PM , Rating: 1
I'm glad to see a gov't taking a real stand on the issue of content and decency. I know America never will, there's no profit in it. This country doesn't do anything unless there's money to be made and porn makes money. Nuff said.


RE: Positive in my mind
By threepac3 on 12/26/2007 7:54:04 PM , Rating: 1
I'm sure some in our(US) government would like to regulate it just as much as you would. I for one think its appalling for the government to step in and regulate it. I'm noticing trend with such countries as Canada and Australia to control as much as possible what people hear in see.


RE: Positive in my mind
By Missing Ghost on 12/27/2007 12:34:35 AM , Rating: 2
Canada? Canada is like the opposite of Australia when it comes to censorship... If you want to talk about countries that act like Australia when it comes to this, I know Poland does all the time.


RE: Positive in my mind
By omnicronx on 12/27/2007 11:43:45 AM , Rating: 2
So very very true, in the states lots of violence is the norm. Canadian shows are the kings of dirty sex jokes. It's no germany, but it is far from censored, you should hear what they can say on the radio here compared to in the states. I don't go a morning without hearing the words 'rusty trombone' or 'dirty sanchez'.


RE: Positive in my mind
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 11:47:09 AM , Rating: 2
The "rusty trombone" hahaha. Havent heard that in a while.....how about the "dizzy gillespie"? haha


RE: Positive in my mind
By afkrotch on 12/27/2007 2:27:56 PM , Rating: 3
Hmm....live in Australia. Out of the question. So would I get a takedown notice if I talk to my wife all dirty on the phone? Here's a better idea. Use the money and resources to kill spam entering the country instead. Porn is a legitimate business and they should just tax the sites.

I doubt they can they'll be able to stop much of anything. Millions of torrents for porn are made each day and are distributed through tons of different sites. They going to have the whole population of Australia scouring the internet for this content?

Probably some politician's attempt to garner support from the public.


RE: Positive in my mind
By fake01 on 12/29/2007 8:35:01 AM , Rating: 2
I agree with it. I don't like the idea of my little brothers or cousins hopping on my PC and looking up porn or some dirty content.

Also They may not be able to prevent people from downloading torrents, considering (like you said) there is so many websites to download them from. I mean they can probably put a block on ".torrent" extension, but people can simply put them in ".RAR" files etc.

But they can block the actual torrent program from working. I don't know how, but my school did it. I tried installing several different download managers and torrent programs, and none of them worked. Hell I even installed Firefox and it didn't work.

I guess each program, when they connect to the internet send a code or something so they can detect other clients etc. I guess the ISP's can pick this code up and block them.


RE: Positive in my mind
By eye smite on 12/28/2007 11:03:59 PM , Rating: 1
There are certain things that don't need to be seen on video or internet or anywhere. Take beastiality for instance, do you want to see that? Do you know how many support calls of outraged customers I've taken because they went to whitehouse.com thinking they'd teach their kids about the whitehouse instead of whitehouse.gov. So again I'm glad to see a gov't sticking to decency and enforcing despite what people think. If you want to see bestiality, it's ok, I'm sure you can go to your local XXX video store and rent it just fine.


RE: Positive in my mind
By matriarch wolf on 2/27/2008 3:06:33 PM , Rating: 2
oops


RE: Positive in my mind
By MGSsancho on 12/26/2007 7:56:04 PM , Rating: 5
How about parents doing a better job in watching their childs online activities? you dont even need software or gps. just take the dsl/cable modem with you to work then hook it up on an agreed upon terms. and if the child really needs internet, libraries


RE: Positive in my mind
By amanojaku on 12/26/2007 8:15:35 PM , Rating: 4
Agreed. Parents need to do their jobs, which includes making sure children learn at school, eat a healthy diet, and not look at material unsuitable for minors. Once the government steps in everyone has to worry about what might be the next illegal act. Like chewing gum. It's illegal in Singapore.

There was a time when alcohol was illegal in America (prohibition) and people drank anyway. Drugs are illegal, but I'm willing to bet that will change before I die. Why should any activity that isn't inherently dangerous be illegal? Porn is no different. (Some people can and will argue that alcohol, drugs, and porn are dangerous, but there are plenty of people who can prove otherwise.)


RE: Positive in my mind
By Missing Ghost on 12/27/2007 12:36:49 AM , Rating: 1
Porn is dangerous?


RE: Positive in my mind
By amanojaku on 12/27/2007 3:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
Not that I am aware of, but anyone can claim anything is dangerous. Why do we need "Caution! Hot!" labels on cups of coffee? Duh, I ordered a HOT coffee. But if I spill it on myself I can sue you for 10 million dollars because the label isn't there...

I have heard arguments against porn, none of which I buy into. Take a look at the Wikipedia entry on porn to see what I'm talking about. The only ban I have against porn is that children shouldn't have access to it, because they shouldn't be having sex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography#Anti-porn...


RE: Positive in my mind
By Oregonian2 on 1/2/2008 8:30:16 PM , Rating: 2
Hormones will probably be outlawed next. :-)

P.S. - Isn't prostitution not-illegal in Australia? I seem to remember something fuzzy along those lines.


RE: Positive in my mind
By andrinoaa on 12/27/07, Rating: -1
RE: Positive in my mind
By TomCorelis on 12/27/2007 1:32:56 PM , Rating: 3
An "attitude towards authority" is a good thing, in my mind. Much of the "authority" in this world needs to be questioned and kept in check...


RE: Positive in my mind
By Drexial on 12/27/2007 4:09:43 PM , Rating: 3
absolutely.

I for one fully believe that parents need to step up responsibility. Stop passing the buck, It's your kid, stop trying to blame everyone else for their attitude. If you let them play the game its not the makers fault or the fault of the store that sold it to them (not saying they should be selling rated games to minors). I believe most movies and games are rated fairly for their content.

By no means am i saying treat your kid like a prick. But respect them just as you want them to respect you. Give them answers for things, don't make crap up. If they have questions don't say "ummm uhhh a stork dropped you off". You don't have to go into details to make a kid understand what they want to know. Kids aren't as retarded as everyone seems to think they are.

I learned to question things at a very young age. Because my parents gave me real answers to the best of their knowledge I never went through a true rebellious phase. What was I supposed to rebel against? "why did you always have to give me answers when I asked questions?"

Though I should say parents, My mom was far more open with me then my dad. My dad was an ass, and I was an ass back to him, my mom respected me and I respected her back... SHOCKING.

I feel this is the way it should be with all authority. Respect is a two way street.


RE: Positive in my mind
By amanojaku on 12/27/2007 3:57:54 PM , Rating: 2
Sigh... how can I explain this in terms you'll understand...

If I say parents should do their jobs how is that an argument AGAINST authority? Or are you saying parents aren't a form of authority?

What I attempted to point out is the extremes to which a government can go in order to "protect" its citizens. In what way is a ban on pornography protecting anyone? Show me and I'll accept that. But there are plenty of ridiculous laws that are not protecting anyone, and in fact infringe upon personal freedom.


RE: Positive in my mind
By Christopher1 on 12/27/2007 9:38:16 AM , Rating: 1
Well, some people try to make the arguments that "Children and teenagers seeing porn will make them want to have sex!" That is actually true, but I encourage children and teenagers to go out and have sex with whoever they wish to and to just protect themselves by knowing the people who they doink and making reasonably sure that they won't get pregnant by having condoms with them and being on birth control in the case of females, and making reasonably sure that the person they are having sex with doesn't have an STD (which is a danger even for ADULTS in the world today, because the government has FAILED at their duty to find vaccines and cures for STD's).

We need to realize that our 'anti-sex' society in this world today is making children MORE likely to get pregnant in the long run, and that there is nothing 'obscene' or 'unsuitable' about children knowing what sex is and even having sexual relationships with other people.

Hell, I am THANKFUL that I started being sexually active at the age of 3 with other children and at 7 with adults and teenagers because it was the ONLY thing that kept me sane when I was a child!
Yes, you heard that right: the ONLY thing that kept me sane (confirmed by 7 psychologists even knowing I am a pedosexual).

It is simply time to realize that children and teenagers don't have anything that is really 'unsuitable' for them. I allow my cousins who are 7 and 10 to play Doom 3, and they are not aggressive at all, because I have told them that violence is okay in fantasy or in computer games, but NOT in real life. Unfortunately, some parents are not doing that and doing it REPEATEDLY so that it sinks into their children's heads.


RE: Positive in my mind
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 10:11:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That is actually true, but I encourage children and teenagers to go out and have sex with whoever they wish

What the hell is wrong w/ you, you sick F***!
quote:
Hell, I am THANKFUL that I started being sexually active at the age of 3 with other children and at 7 with adults and teenagers because it was the ONLY thing that kept me sane when I was a child!

I do not consider you a SANE person now, or ever.
quote:
(confirmed by 7 psychologists even knowing I am a pedosexual).

Maybe you should be seeing prison time, instead of psychologist time. And there is no such thing as a "Pedosexual" - we will not coin your "term" for social acceptance. You are a sexual predator, and sick at that.
quote:
Unfortunately, some parents are not doing that and doing it REPEATEDLY so that it sinks into their children's heads.

This coming from someone who's parents stuck the "sexual predator" outlook into your head - you're trying to tell 7yr old kids to have sex...and you expect anyone to listen to you?

Sick F***.


RE: Positive in my mind
By amanojaku on 12/27/2007 4:08:18 PM , Rating: 2
I have to object to nearly everything you say, except the "Doom 3" statement. Video games are very different from sex. Children under a certain age should NOT have sex. There are plenty of adults that don't understand the repercussions of sex; how can a child understand?

As for sex keeping you sane, I have to think you are wrong. Perhaps, through no fault of your own, your upbringing was less than ideal, but there were other outlets for your frustration. You could have just played games or learned about art, music, science, etc... Plenty of people get sex every day and are still screwed in the head. You've admitted that it's the case with you, as well.

You're trying to justify your desire to molest children who can't fight back. Abusing the weak is more than wrong, it's sick.


RE: Positive in my mind
By bighairycamel on 12/28/2007 10:11:08 AM , Rating: 2
SARCASM'D!!

at least I hope so


RE: Positive in my mind
By ThePooBurner on 12/27/2007 1:25:52 AM , Rating: 2
Libraries proxies are only as good as those that run them. I have seen people looking at porn at the library, so that really isn't an option that would keep them from seeing it; but that really comes back to what the parents have taught/teach their kids reguarding it. Some paretns, i'm sure, don't care about their kids looking at porn. 2 sides on every issue means that rarely will either side win. Though i am amazed at this:
quote:
Content that is rated above the R18+ rating (namely, X18+ or "refused classification") is banned entirely from the Australian Internet

The whole country banned porn on the net. I'm sure there are a lot of aussies that are going to be mad about that. Though, since i am from the anti-porn side, i don't care much. :) I just think it's amazing that porn would be banned outright by the country.


RE: Positive in my mind
By Bladen on 12/27/2007 5:42:20 AM , Rating: 2
It's just Aus sites that aren't allowed porn of that nature.

All the good stuff comes from overseas, so this will achieve nothing.


RE: Positive in my mind
By jtesoro on 12/27/2007 8:25:41 AM , Rating: 2
This has been mentioned by a couple of people already, but just would like to ask again if anyone knows how this age verification mechanism will be implemented.


RE: Positive in my mind
By MrPickins on 12/27/2007 12:50:55 PM , Rating: 3
Profit isn't the issue.

It's really the fault of that pesky Bill of Rights...


RE: Positive in my mind
By MrPickins on 12/27/2007 12:48:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

The way I see it, video stores and game retailers have been implementing these laws for years. Now we have a way to implement the same laws for what was a largely unprotected medium such as the internet.


Stores do not implement laws.


Banning Internet Content ~
By gudodayn on 12/26/2007 8:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
I think its OK to limit in some ways but to ban it to this extent will just cause problems in the long run.
Education to prevent is more effective than no knowledge so BAN!!
As an aussie myself living different parts of the world cause of my work........I've seen many Governments / ISPs ban stuff like this but it never works out in the end.......the World Wide Web is just too big and there are just always loop holes for people to find!!!




RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By Christopher1 on 12/27/07, Rating: -1
RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By Screwballl on 12/27/2007 10:48:46 AM , Rating: 3
promoting children drinking alcohol?
promoting sex from age 3 and up?
promoting pedophiles, sexual deviants and sexual predators?

You are what is wrong with this world and you are the type of person that needs to be banned from even living. Darwins Award is coming soon to your casket.

You are so far out there that it is a wonder that someone hasn't come along and shot you in the head just for being so dumb.


By StevoLincolnite on 12/27/2007 1:29:14 PM , Rating: 2
I honestly could never do that to my own child.
All children are innocent and should never have to know about the birds and the bee's till they hit puberty.


RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By mdogs444 on 12/27/2007 6:28:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
we should allow children to be sexually active, but protect them by having it out in the open and getting rid of all the 'statutory rape' and 'child sexual abuse' laws

Wow . Thats all I have to say, because I am shocked.
quote:
We should be ENCOURAGING children to drink while in the view of parents where they can be monitored and make sure that they don't get drunk, encourage them to have sexual relationships from an early age with ANYONE so that they realize what is a good sexual relationship, and start letting them experiment with drugs in front of their parents in order to monitor how much they use.

What the F*** planet are you living on? Seriously, are you on drugs right now? Its quite scary that there are people out there like you.


RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By helms on 12/28/2007 10:16:57 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure there are a lot of teenagers who have had sex before they reached the age of 18. I find societies negative attitude on persons below 18 years of age having sex wrong.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200711...
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Teen-Pregnancy-862/age-...

In the past when people didn't have long lives most probably a large number of people had sex and gave birth before reaching the age of 18. Looking at apes I doubt apes have such age restrictions. Apes will probably have sex with each other as soon as their body is ready for it.

I have a problem with the fact that society views persons under the age of 18 as being inferior and unable to think for themselves. I think instead of 18 it should be lowered to 15. Why 15 you ask? From what I can glean females under the age of 15 have increased risk when giving birth, which tells me that before 15 females are not ready to have sex.

That is not to say that someone as young as 15 should have sex and give birth, I'm just saying it shouldn't be considered taboo which is what it is considered as now. From the links above it is clear that teenagers below the age of 18 are having sex and giving birth.

Someone as young as 15 shouldn't be having sex and giving birth not because they are inferior and incapable of thinking for themselves (due to the fact they are not over 18) but because they probably don't have the finances to raise a child if they become pregnant. Another reason why they shouldn't have sex is because they haven't finished high school and would have a hard time getting through high school if they became pregnant.

This is a waste of my time replying to religious people who would have no trouble believing the earth was flat and enforcing it by locking those who said it was round if they lived in a different era rather than the current one.

Yes I am atheist, hell you can even call me a devil worshiper.


RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By mdogs444 on 12/28/2007 11:50:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes I am atheist, hell you can even call me a devil worshiper.

No I wont call you a devil worshiper because I could care less about your religious faith, or lack there of. However, I will call you a fucking moron, and an idiot to boot.

No where in my post did I mention religion, nor did I mention anything about 15 year olds having sex - and whether they are phsycially or financially ready.

My post was in response to Christopher1 wanting to get rid of rape laws against children (of any age), because he likes little boys & girls. It was also in response to him suggesting that parents promote their small children to have sex with people.


RE: Banning Internet Content ~
By andrinoaa on 12/27/2007 4:36:05 PM , Rating: 1
Personally I want access to what I want to . So yes , I am against censorship on this level. HOWEVER, I am absolutely infuriated that so much of this shit is in our faces 24/7 when it does not need to be. News services that depict tragedy in the middle of a kids show , as an example.
Rap PORN in a pop show that appeals to young girls ie 12/13yrs old. Popup porn sites etc etc etc.
Its bullshit to say its up to parents to protect kids from this shit when its all pervasive. Its freedom gone feral.If you want to protect your true freedom, this crap has to come under some restrictions. Maybe we need to learn more by doing, afterall its a relatvely new phenomenon.


Banning internet content
By mikeyD95125 on 12/27/2007 3:48:23 AM , Rating: 2
kinda sounds like China..

Scary to think about actually.




RE: Banning internet content
By andrinoaa on 12/27/2007 5:52:58 AM , Rating: 2
I think everyone should take a cold shower. This article is a little shrilly. It isn't the australia I live in. I can't remember the last book to be banned. As for censorship, in the main stream distribution channels its a good idea. If you really must have something you can still find it by other means. I think its a good idea because some body is taking a stand and not saying "the problem is too big"
If other countries did the same rather then shrill " freedom, freedom " True freedom wouldn't suffer from the chicken little effect.
We ain't like china. But hey, who is to say china is bad anyway. Last I read china, china hasn't started any wars for oil lately.


RE: Banning internet content
By overzealot on 12/27/2007 12:47:17 PM , Rating: 2
We'll just have to wait and see how they implement this.
From what I've read it's really not a big concern, they're mostly targeting sites within Aus.
If they block anything important, though, all hell is going to break loose.

Games still get banned(at least until censored) here occaisionally though. I remember Duke Nukem 3D, they put stars over nipples etc. Although, with game prices being as high as they are, importing a game is as cheap as buying it over the counter so if you the uncensored version you just get it.


RE: Banning internet content
By StevoLincolnite on 12/27/2007 1:31:30 PM , Rating: 2
And they banned postal 2...


RE: Banning internet content
By Rhaido on 12/27/2007 3:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
"We ain't like china. But hey, who is to say china is bad anyway. Last I read china, china hasn't started any wars for oil lately."

Hell yeah comrade, China rawks! Although I miss the glory days of 1949-1976. In your face Stalin! WOOT!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_deaths_and_atroc...

There are way too many ignorant people on this planet who need to take a break from tech sites and learn some world history. The Chinese government killed between 30 and 40 million of its own not too long ago.


RE: Banning internet content
By andrinoaa on 12/27/2007 4:18:47 PM , Rating: 2
Why did you take it literal? I only tried to show the hipocrisy of it all. And have a laugh, doh!


Please.. this is rediculous
By hitman699 on 12/26/2007 10:09:22 PM , Rating: 5
This is not the kidternet Parents should watch there kids and act like parents. these regulations are silly. if people are so concerned about what kids can see maybe they should create a kids only internet.. barney the dinosaur can be the mascot... and the govt can regulate all it wants. You should not have to verify every persons age that comes to your site or dumb it down for the kids.. a disclaimer should be sufficient and if a kid goes to the site he should be trespassing and maybe have his mommy called.. plus credit card companies give cards and debit cards to kids also..or they can buy a prepaid.. so thats not a good way to verify age. so what is a website supposed to do? request notarized drivers license and birth certificate info? this crap doesn't fly in the US for a reason.. but then again.. they can just do what the US did and and get visa to do thier dirty work for them....




RE: Please.. this is rediculous
By Puddyglum1 on 12/27/2007 12:41:46 PM , Rating: 2
I don't believe this is entirely about protecting kids. They've banned all X-rated content entirely, aside from P2P networks.
quote:
if people are so concerned about what kids can see maybe they should create a kids only internet
That idea was rejected. See http://www.dailytech.com/ICANN+Once+More+Rejects+C...
quote:
plus credit card companies give cards and debit cards to kids also..or they can buy a prepaid.. so thats not a good way to verify age.
Prepaid will not work, and credit cards for minors are flagged as such during verification.

I think the voters of Australia have the right to do what they deem necessary to restrict their children from seeing adult content.


By StevoLincolnite on 12/27/2007 1:26:39 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't vote... But all I am happy about that Kevin rudd is in power is that silly Work Relations crap has gone out the window, and that we will not be building nuclear power plants.


I'm with Mark on this one
By shanegl on 12/27/2007 6:36:51 AM , Rating: 5
"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."
-- Mark Twain




RE: I'm with Mark on this one
By BMFPitt on 12/27/2007 9:21:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Australia has long carried a reputation for having one of the most restrictive censorship protocols in the western world. Books, movies, and video games that are rated X18+ (roughly equivalent to AO or NC-17) are heavily restricted in their sale – oftentimes, banned entirely – and content that does not fit into any of the OFLC’s guidelines is banned and blocked from import.
Here's my take on this: If you're going to go to the trouble of creating an age verification system, good for you. Now you have absolutely no reason to have any censorship on content for people 18+. It sounds as though they will continue to prevent adults from viewing things they deem offensive.

My theory is that as long as technology allows parents to control what their kids have access to, no one should ever be able to use "to protect the children" as an excuse.


By StevoLincolnite on 12/27/2007 1:30:41 PM , Rating: 2
The sad part about all of this is, a 10 year old can walk into a movie theater which is R+ rated and get away with it, same thing happens when they hire a movie.
Still, I think it is better than nothing.


Hyperbole
By MikeZombie777 on 12/27/2007 7:54:26 PM , Rating: 3
As an Australian citizen, someone who has lived in this country my entire life, I can very comfortably say that this news article is nothing more than hyperbole.

" if content resides outside of Australia it is added to the blacklist on the country’s mandatory Internet censor."

Firstly, this is not China, there is no "mandatory internet censor" currently in place within Australia. Overseas websites are not in anyway "blocked" or "censored". The media release this article cites makes no mention of such and thus I can only concluded that this was simply made up. The ousted Howard Government did how ever arrange for free, voluntary, software based internet filters to made available to anybody who requests them.

"Australia has long carried a reputation for having one of the most restrictive censorship protocols in the western world."

This statement is just hyperbole, nothing more. I don't know where the author got this information from but if you want to write about a country with one of the most strict censorship protocols in the Western World than Singapore or Germany would be your best bet. Australia is a very liberal country but like 99% of nations in the Western world it employs a mandatory censorship regime and outlaws certain things to some extent. Britain, New Zealand and Canada all have censorship regimes enforceable by law. New Zealand has banned video games in the past and continues to do so on occasions. There are many films banned/censored in Britain and New Zealand which are available legally uncut in Australia. Hardcore Horror movies are pretty much routinely censored by the BBFC in Britain. The game Manhunt 2 was banned in Britain also. Porn is regularly censored in Canada to remove offensive fetishes such as spanking. Canadian customs are also known to regularly seize porn. You can find this information from anti-censorship sites such as melonfarmers.co.uk & refused-classification.com. They are very informative sites and dedicated to informing the public in regards to censorship all over the world.

It's obvious by this point that the article in question was written by an overzealous American liberal which wouldn't be satisfied until the world is living in anarchy. Censorship exists in every nation on Earth and singling out Australia and THEN spurting out blatant misinformation & such only perpetuates ignorance. Seriously have you ever watched a U.S TV show and then an Australian TV show? The FCC in the US forces shows to bleep out every "bad word" in the book. Jerry Springer is a prime example. The damn sound cuts out every 5 seconds to mask swear worlds. You even have peoples butts in thongs/g-strings being pixelated. Such does not happen with Australian shows. What right do you have to pick on Australia when self-censorship is rife in the United States? What about the Janet Jackson nipple incident? America needs to practice what it preaches.

Books, movies, and video games that are rated X18+ (roughly equivalent to AO or NC-17) are heavily restricted in their sale – oftentimes, banned entirely – and content that does not fit into any of the OFLC’s guidelines is banned and blocked from import.

Well actually NC-17 is equivalent to our R18+ rating. When was the last time you heard of the MPAA giving porn an NC-17 rating? Our X18+ rating is exclusively for porn. It is legal to buy it via mail order, posses it and carry it to all states and territories in Australia.In some parts of AU it is also legal to just buy it straight from a sex shop. Although every adult shop I've ever been to in Australia has openly sold X18+ films because it is a law which is not enforced. Nobody gives a crap about it.

To the author I say this: At least get your facts right before publishing an article.This one is full of misinformation and ignorance. All you achieve by publishing such an article is you gain the ability to misinform readers. Australia is a very great, liberal nation and does not in anyway deserve to be portrayed as a nanny state hell bent on dictating citizens. Such a portrayal is just simply wrong and very ignorant.




RE: Hyperbole
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 12/28/2007 6:58:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Firstly, this is not China, there is no "mandatory internet censor" currently in place within Australia.


So, the EFA exists for no reason in Australia? I've never been exposed to the ACMA directly, but it seems very clear that anything the ACMA deems "questionable" must be taken down immediately. But the ACMA is barely saying what's questionable and what isn't. Odd.

quote:
I don't know where the author got this information

One of the primary sources for this article was the Electronic Frontiers Australia -- which is similar to the EFF in the U.S. Specifically, view this document that compares Australia'a censorship policies to others around the world.

http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html

As mentioned by Corelis, the laws are certainly there. If the government choses to ignore the laws, as you suggest they are doing, then it seems curious why they are in place at all -- a topic the EFA has a lot to say about.


RE: Hyperbole
By MikeZombie777 on 12/29/2007 8:09:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So, the EFA exists for no reason in Australia? I've never been exposed to the ACMA directly, but it seems very clear that anything the ACMA deems "questionable" must be taken down immediately. But the ACMA is barely saying what's questionable and what isn't. Odd.


quote:
One of the primary sources for this article was the Electronic Frontiers Australia -- which is similar to the EFF in the U.S. Specifically, view this document that compares Australia'a censorship policies to others around the world.


Australian hosted content being taken down by the ACMA has nothing to do with mandatory filtering. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that ACMA does not have the power to take down or otherwise block sites hosted overseas. Currently there are no laws in Australia which mandate content filtering. You are confusing filtering with take-down notices. Did you actually read the Australian section of the link you just posted? It clear states the following:

"the law has been implemented in a way that does not require ISPs to block access to content hosted outside Australia. Instead, the ABA notifies filtering/blocking software providers of content hosted outside Australia to be added to their blacklists. Australian Internet users are not required by law to use blocking software."


As it stands Australian citizens are quite free to access any type of content they wish. There is a very big difference between local take-down notices and content filtering.

Please do some research in the future.


hey now.. they hiring???
By kattanna on 12/27/2007 10:47:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
All content, including web pages and mobile phone content, is examined by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) and assigned a rating according to the country’s national ratings system


AKA a group of people are PAID to sit on their butts all day and surf for porn. sign me up..

where do i apply for that job?

can i do it remotely?

;>)




That is cool but ..
By Shark Tek on 12/27/2007 1:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder how they can effectively identify a minor in the internet.

User & Passw isn't the best way they can find adult credentials and get over that obstacle easily.




publicity
By tastyratz on 1/2/08, Rating: 0
"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki