Looks Like Australia's Plan To Censor The Internet Is Dead... Again... For Now
from the so-much-for-that-plan dept
Australian politicians have been pushing a variety of schemes to censor the internet for years... and each time they waste millions of taxpayer dollars before they discover that the plan doesn't work, at all. Yet... they keep trying. The most recent plan involved some "tests" where ISPs would be forced to block a secret blacklist of sites -- which many ISPs pointed out was stupid and wouldn't work. While some politicians are still insisting it's necessary, it looks like there is no longer enough support in the Australian Senate to pass the law that would make such filtering mandatory. In other words, it's yet another costly Australian censorship plan down the drain. Until the next one, of course.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: australia, censorship
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yay!
Censorship bad!
Liberty Good!</yay>
(that concludes today's lesson)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yay!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At last, someone in the Senate has seen reason
I would have thought that the instigator of this stupid idea (Senator Conroy, I'm looking at you) would have realised early on how few people actually want any form of censorship from the amazingly poor take-up of the free PC-based filtering software made available by the previous government on the home-page of every ISP in the country (from memory around a 1-2% take-up).
Of course, some of the more vocal 'child-protection' lobbies will be disappointed - especially the ones that loudly proclaimed 'If you are against the filter you must be a peodophile', which now, in their eyes, must include the vast majority of the Australian public, and a simple majority of the Senate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: At last, someone in the Senate has seen reason
And Alan(Comment 5) - Nick didn't need to oppose it. For it to pass the ALP would have needed either the Liberals/Nationals to support it or have the support of the Greens(who have always opposed it), Nick, and Family First(who being a right-wing Christian nutcase would always support it). Nick could still vote for it(if it gets to the senate) and it still won't come in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isn't that one of the secret political party preferences?
Isn't it usually the individuals who spend much time and energy (not to mention taxpayer money) promoting these things usually the ones that are guilty themselves? Perhaps they are so guilty of their own actions that they feel the need to 'protect the children' that they haven't already gotten to..
Okay, that's probably wrong on so many levels...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Filtering
It would have been better spent offering local filtering (net nanny) type software for parents who feel the need for filtering.
At least the majority will still be able to enjoy private unfiltered bandwidth at normal speeds.
Lets hope this is the last we hear of this ridiculous idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Filtering
However, Senator Conroy has spun this to mean that, rather than people not wanting/being interested in a filtered feed, the installation and use of the software must have been too difficult for people, hence the idea of installing filters at the ISP level.
The fact that the 1-2% was the download figure rather than the usage figure was completely lost on him. But, just to make sure, the current government has removed all the free filters now so the only option is their 'cleanfeed' system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
transparent facade
I would like just one of these jokers to speak up and admit the truth, but that wont happen - so they hide behind a transparent facade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not for long
[ link to this | view in chronology ]