Print 34 comment(s) - last by inc0gnito.. on Sep 26 at 3:14 AM

It's unclear if this move is temporary or permanent

Iran has put a plan in motion to filter Google and Gmail throughout the country after YouTube refused to take down an anti-Islam film.
YouTube, which is owned by Google, recently refused to get rid of an anti-muslim film called "Innocence of Muslims." Iranian officials were not pleased with this decision, and in response, will begin filtering Google and Gmail in the country. It's unclear if this is a temporary or permanent move. 
"Google and Gmail will be filtered throughout the country until further notice," said Abdolsamad Khoramabadi, an Iranian official. 
According to Khoramabadi, the government is doing this in response to the request of Iranian citizens, who are supposedly up-in-arms about the film. However, the Guardian found that Iranian citizens don't seem to care about the film at all. In fact, a tweet from Golnaz Esfandiari, a blogger on the Radio Free Europe Website Persian Letters, said that the Iranian government is punishing its citizens over the movie. 
This move parallels another plan that the Iranian government has been planning: a national Internet. This means that Iran will have a countrywide network instead of those that run through the World Wide Web.
Clearly, the Iranian government is censoring its people from the contents of the film -- and with a national Internet, it can censor whatever it wants from citizens. Aside from controlling what its people see and hear, these efforts are also answers to security concerns. The country doesn't want any cyber attacks from the World Wide Web to obtain sensitive information. 
This is a pretty valid concern, considering Iran's oil industry was hit with a cyber attack this past April. On the other hand, Iran has been doing some hacking of its own, such as the U.S. Drone last year.  
Iran has already blocked many websites, such as Facebook. But Iranians can access the site via proxy servers or virtual private network services. 
Google and Gmail access has been spotty since the announcement that both will be filtered. Some citizens in Tehran said they've lost access while others in Isfahan can still view both.

Source: The Guardian

Comments     Threshold

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

Its good
By inc0gnito on 9/25/12, Rating: 0
RE: Its good
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 6:27:14 AM , Rating: 3
Great case. Your honor I didn't like what was posted so I willfully destroyed property and murdered people who had nothing to do with it. They were from the same country as google so they had it coming. Causing a panic is not the same as people rioting because they don't like what you say 10000 miles away.

RE: Its good
By inc0gnito on 9/25/12, Rating: 0
RE: Its good
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 9:51:45 AM , Rating: 2
I can tell you Incitement of violence doesnt come from voluntarily searching for then watching a video on You Tube.

RE: Its good
By drlumen on 9/25/2012 11:12:36 AM , Rating: 2
Kinda like the yelling-fire-in-a-crowded-theater scenario I can kinda see the argument about the movie causing injuries or destruction but it is a flimsy argument. I too believe this is just being trumped up to justify censorship.

I find it ironic that there are nut jobs out there that are rioting or killing in the name of Islam because of a short movie. In a way, it kinda proves the whole point of the movie - at least where the nut jobs are concerned.

I don't endorse the movie as I can see where some could be offended. I know I was offended by the poor chroma-key and acting. Should that be a reason to start riots at the local film schools?

RE: Its good
By ClownPuncher on 9/25/2012 11:36:49 AM , Rating: 2
People are making the choice to become violent. IF you can't control your own violent outbursts, you have other problems.

RE: Its good
By theapparition on 9/25/2012 10:05:37 AM , Rating: 4
Good Constitutional analysis.

Now when you grow up, you can get that law degree. After practicing constitutional law for years you'll be ready. Then argue why you think it should be taken down.

Or more likely, you won't have to argue because when you pass the bar and specialize in constitutional law you'll see why this isn't violating any laws.

Free speech isn't to protect things you like, it's to protect speech you don't. You can't incite riots or yell fire in a crowded theater. Recently, race has also been loosely connected as hate speech.

But this film does neither. Perhaps you should watch it to figure out why.

People who don't like the content of this film are free to dismiss it, to criticize it, or to assemble and protest peacefully in this country. They aren't free to start any riot.

The film paints Islam in a bad light. No doubt about it. But killing others over a stupid film done by a radical wackjob has now lent credence to the film message. The Muslim contries have done a nice job filling the stereotype and rioting and killing over a film that says they riot and kill.

Oh, and BTW. There is no "Free Speech Act". Free speech is included in the First Amendment.

RE: Its good
By Dr of crap on 9/25/2012 11:08:33 AM , Rating: 2
And you summed up everyones feelings about how they react "over there"

Bravo sir!

RE: Its good
By MZperX on 9/25/2012 12:30:38 PM , Rating: 1
Dumbest post of the week no question about it. I hope for your sake that you are either young and clueless so at least there is a slim chance that you'll come to your senses with age and experience, or from another country and have no concept of freedom of speech simply due to cultural differences. In any case, you utterly failed to understand the situation as well as failed to make any kind of sense. My condolences.

RE: Its good
By inc0gnito on 9/26/2012 3:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
Well please enlighten me what type of speech the first amendment does NOT protect? Also, what constitutes hate speech and what constitutes incitement of violence?

Or does the first amendment just provides protection to all forms of speech? I just wanna know what all I can get away with here. :P

So, What Was That About China Then?
By madfry on 9/25/2012 4:47:31 AM , Rating: 1
I mean, Google rolls over and play dead there, whereas in Iran, something that plays to the sensitivities of the people, they suddenly stood up as the bastion of free speech? That the Iranians were irrational?

Every time something like this comes up, it is protected because of free speech, only if the free speech benefits certain parties only.

RE: So, What Was That About China Then?
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 6:28:50 AM , Rating: 2
Explain how google rolled over in china?

By bah12 on 9/25/2012 5:01:53 PM , Rating: 2
I think he is refering to them refusing to filter content not approved by the government. At first they refused and quit doing business in China. Later they caved and decided they would alow some censoring, as they didn't want to lose the business.

His point. Why refuse to censor in Iran, and then allow censorship in China. The answer of course is easy. China was too big of a market to lose.

By Icopoli on 9/25/2012 6:01:39 PM , Rating: 2
1.3 billion people vs 75 million.

Where do you think the money is?

By mchentz on 9/25/2012 2:14:36 AM , Rating: 2
Censoring of any thing or not telling the truth about something will almost always come back to haunt you.

RE: Truth
By martin5000 on 9/25/2012 5:05:41 AM , Rating: 2
Completely agree. Imagine the problems China is storing up.

The spreading of sin.
By drycrust3 on 9/25/2012 12:07:44 PM , Rating: 4
the government is doing this in response to the request of Iranian citizens, who are supposedly up-in-arms about the film.

I find it interesting that arguably one sin, in this case making a movie that arguably isn't true (false witness), suddenly becomes an excuse for lots more sin. Isn't the point of religious law to tell us how to behave so we don't sin? Yet here we have religious leaders giving approval to the looting and destruction of private property (stealing) and loss of life (murder) and what not, all of which, at least under Mosaic law (i.e. Old Testament law, what I am familiar with) are crimes.

F**k Iran
By inperfectdarkness on 9/25/2012 2:29:59 PM , Rating: 4
Study released this week demonstrates a direct correlation between internet censorship and human rights abuses.

Just saying.

Wait -
By Dr of crap on 9/25/2012 8:29:40 AM , Rating: 1
Like Google cares that Iran is going to filter it - OH MY!
Think if the tens of people that will suffer! How many PC and smart phones could they have over there? It MUST be against their religion after all.

Come on. THIS IS THE KIND OF THING THAT MAKES THOSE HERE POST THESE VIDEOS. If they had any sense of anything, the HEADS of their supposed church would tell the people to IGNORE the video and it will go away after time.

This is why the rest of the world is so against the Islamic people. They say everything is for their religion and yet they destroy sh$t in the name of their religion. Nice attitude, control yourself will you. IT'S A FREAKING VIDEO. JUST IN CASE YOU DIDN'T GET IT, IT SATIRE, IT'S SUPPOSE TO POKE FUN AT SOMEONE. CAN'T TAKE A JOKE?

Get over it. Name calling and you destroy stuff? Playground attitude, haven't gone past Kindergarden age yet!

RE: Wait -
By bah12 on 9/25/2012 5:12:34 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, if Christians have to deal with Mr. Hanky the Christmas poo, and Jesus fighting Santa. Censorship of any kind only promotes ignorance.

What is ironic is it's free speech that alows Jews, Christians, Muslims, Mormons, and yes even whatever that religion crazy Tom Cruise belives in to exist in the US. Our very country was founded on religious freedom, and the Protestant movement that was just as blasphemous to the Cathloic church as this film is to Islam. However it is because of everyones right to freedom of speech and religion that the Islamic church has grown in recent decades. If our founding father's had not seen the danger in censorship, and responded as Iran has and outlawed that which they clearly oppose. There'd be no Mosques here. It is because of those protection that Islam thrives, not the other way around.

So yes, you have to deal with the offensive, but it is exactly this tolerence that allows everyone to thrive.

China, anyone?
By CityZen on 9/25/2012 1:31:20 AM , Rating: 2
The Great Firewall of ... Iran?

Look at this way.
By dark matter on 9/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: Look at this way.
By semiconshawn on 9/25/12, Rating: 0
RE: Look at this way.
By mcnabney on 9/25/2012 9:37:09 AM , Rating: 2
I know! In 'those countries' people riot when insults to Islam, which can be a capital crime in their nations, originate in other countries but are made available to their population. In the West, we only burn the city down when we don't like a jury verdict or the home sports team wins. We are totally better.

RE: Look at this way.
By theapparition on 9/25/2012 10:09:44 AM , Rating: 3
A few drunks flipping a couple of cars and standing on light poles constitutes "burning a city down".

I'd hate to see your definition on other things.

RE: Look at this way.
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 6:44:48 AM , Rating: 2
people have died because of this video.

Really from a video? You don't blame the people who committed the crimes huh? That is brilliant.

RE: Look at this way.
By Manch on 9/25/2012 10:37:52 AM , Rating: 1
Again no one likes the RIAA or the fact that they pick on 10yr old girls, but it still isn't comparable to what Iran is asking.

Your first post didn't get the reaction you wanted so you changed it a bit hoping for a better response?

No people didn't just die because of the video. Extremists used the video as an excuse to murder people, and dumbshits like you legitimize it with your nonsensical, hair splitting, moral relativisms.

RE: Look at this way.
By NellyFromMA on 9/25/2012 12:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
You were down rated but you make an EXCELLENT point! Great comparison!

I'm totally NOT for banning the film because the film isn't hurting people, people are and they are acting foolish in becoming violent over a film. That's just my opinion.

However, it's GLARINGLY strange that indeed the reality of the situation is effectively exactly what you state...

Double standards?
By dark matter on 9/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: Double standards?
By Manch on 9/25/2012 3:03:31 AM , Rating: 5
The owners of "the innocence of Muslims" posted there video on Youtube. The videos the MPAA & RIAA ask youtube to take down were posted by other people that do not own the copyrighted videos they posted.

Two different things, so there's no double standard here. I have no love for the MPAA or the RIAA, but these two things just aren't comparable.

Sounds like you were just trying to find an excuse to bash on America.

RE: Double standards?
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 6:40:25 AM , Rating: 2
He bashed America lets burn up our stuff and kill some people. He posted it on the Internet it must be true unless somebody takes it down.

RE: Double standards?
By semiconshawn on 9/25/2012 4:23:06 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, and America is the country that has made the most amount of takedown requests on the globe.

What a shocker the country where google is located and every govt agency from local to national has access has the most take down requests. No way. Who cares anyway a request is just that. If they forced or demanded lawful content removed that's different. A request is made and denied unless a law has been broken or there is a court order.

RE: Double standards?
By FITCamaro on 9/25/2012 8:47:42 AM , Rating: 3
So you're comparing copyright violations to freedom of speech?


RE: Double standards?
By nafhan on 9/25/2012 10:22:10 AM , Rating: 2
Many Americans are annoyed with both situations. It's not a case where you can only pick one. On top of that, as others have mentioned, it's not apples to apples. Copyright and the penalties for infringement are usually fairly clear from a legal perspective (even if you disagree with the laws), but "offensive" is pretty much the opposite: hard to define, lots of exceptions, and often no penalties for going against accepted definitions of what's offensive.

Plus, Youtube did block the video in a number of countries where the national government requested it. Your(?) government is keeping you safe from the bad people... don't worry.

"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki