How The EU's Proposed New 'Privacy' Rules Will Be A Tool For Massive Censorship
Techdirt Reading List: The Lever of Riches
The European Union's New Net Neutrality 'Protections' Are A Joke
With Another Major Expansion, Google Fiber's Looking Less Like An Adorable Experiment And More Like A Disruptive Broadband Revolution

UK Prime Minister Apparently Last To Realize New EU Net Neutrality Rules Mean No Porn Filtering

Free Speech

from the Cameron-noted-he-'doesn't-really-keep-up-with-the-news...' dept

Thu, Oct 29th 2015 11:50am — Tim Cushing

The EU's new net neutrality "protections" are largely deserving of the scare quotes, what with their myriad loopholes and built-in provisions that allow ISPs to throttle/manipulate traffic to prevent "congestion" -- something that has yet to be the actual source of any ISP's "traffic $haping" efforts.

But what the rules did do is throw off David Cameron's ongoing plans for a porn-free UK. And, of course -- considering Cameron has no idea how ISP-level filters work, much less aware of numerous logical fallacies "supporting" his claims this will actually prevent porn consumption by minors -- the Prime Minister was the last to know.

During Prime Minister's Questions, Cameron said he realised the knock-on effect from the EU bill over breakfast.

"When I read my Daily Mail this morning, I sputtered over my cornflakes because we worked so hard to put in place these filters," he told fellow MPs.
The new neutrality rules forbid traffic discrimination (except when they don't; see above). Porn filtering at the ISP level is exactly that: blocking certain traffic simply because of its originating source. So much for Cameron's "voluntary*" porn-filtering scheme.

*under the threat of legislation

And now the man who reckons porn filtering will work because he says it will work has secured a temporary exception from the EU's new rules. How long it will last is unknown. In the meantime, Cameron will be working hard to legislate a UK-only neutrality loophole that will hopefully survive inspection by the EU. This unexpected dismantling of his slapped-together, officially unofficial porn ban has resulted in Cameron stepping up his push to upgrade "voluntary" filtering to "mandatory."
Cameron continued: "I can tell the House that we will legislate to put our agreement with internet companies into the law of the land so that our children will be protected."
LOL at agreement. "Do this or else" isn't an "agreement." Now, despite being previously voluntold by Cameron to make with the porn filtering, ISPs will now be legislated at by the shocked and worried Prime Minister. Presumably this effort will ultimately be successful, as voting against this would suggest the reluctant legislator(s) believe underage children should have access to porn, rather than said legislator(s) feeling the government shouldn't be in the business of deciding what forms of legal entertainment ISP subscribers can access.

Hide this

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: david cameron, free speech, net neutrality, porn filters, uk

46 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    wereisjessicahyde (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 11:57am

    Although I disagree with the whole filtering situation it isn't as bad as this article is making out. When you sign up for a new ISP you have two options - Filtered or Not Filtered it is as simple as that.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:04pm

      Re:

      What if I don't want to get exposed as a "porn viewer" even if my intention is to avoid false positives?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 1:45am

        Re: Re:

        When I recently signed up to BT I never got asked and have no filtering.

        I think the ISPs are also ignoring Daves daft plans.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:08pm

      Re:

      And now Sir Illiterate-at-Internet wants to make it always filtered, all the time. Which means it will become even less effective.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        wereisjessicahyde (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:11pm

        Re: Re:

        No he isn't. He is trying to make UK law that will allow the existing system after the EU decision. I can't stand the bloke but lets stick to facts and not get carried away.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 6:46pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Doesn't make him any less of an internet idiot though. :P

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 1:57pm

      Re:

      Filtering the net on ISP-level is not a smart move. Relieve the filtering software from the ISPs and give people the option of getting it for free as soon as you change ISP.

      In that way he can still get his filter and keep net neutrality.

      But ISPs should be kept out of the censorship battles. They are too easy to abuse for circumvention of human rights.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:09pm

      Re:

      Until the new filters come in where the choices are Filtered or 'go on the sex offenders register'

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 11:57am

    Because all the previous british head of states were so pure under the sheets.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 11:58am

    Pig fucker Cameron wants to make porn filters mandatory.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 1:16am

      Re:

      In this case, he is really doing it for the public.

      He wants to protect us from the horror when that picture gets public.

      /sarc

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:01pm

    With all of Cameron's work to "think of the children", one would expect him to have the same response of sputtering over his cornflakes with newspaper headlines such as "The Westminster child abuse 'coverup'".

    Shame he hasn't put forth much as much effort into that as his internet filtering...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:10pm

      Re:

      The pig fucking story has dimmed the lights on the child abuse enquiry quite a bit, which suits Cameron and Osborne down to the ground because it's quite obvious that their defence of paedophiles can only be because it's something they're both deeply involved with.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 10:48am

      Re:

      Maybe concern for the elite pedophiles is the reason why he is doing this. They just keep on going on about how it was so much easier to groom kids when they couldn't get porn on their own easily.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:06pm

    Cameron is possibly the worst thing that has happened to the UK in a while. If he's so worried about the children he shouldn't be forcing Orwellian laws on the citizenry. Kids in the UK are looking into a bleak future.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:15pm

      Re:

      the kids will still get to the pornz though... not going to be stopping that!

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        LeeJS (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 2:50pm

        Re: Re:

        Some will. Some won't because of this. If you can't plug all the holes in the bucket you're saying we shouldn't bother at all?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:01pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          The most likely result of the filter is that some parents feel good about protecting their kids without changing their actual access to porn. When kids reach an age that porn becomes of interest they will find a way to get hold of it.
          Like DRM, such filters fail when one person in a group can bypass their control.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 1:48am

          Re: Re: Re:

          As a child in the UK I had access to porn, and that was before the internet.

          Dave reads the Daily Fail, which says all we need to know about him. They started this ridiculous charade.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Ruben, 30 Oct 2015 @ 8:15am

          Re: Re: Re:

          When it comes to censoring the internet, yes.

          If you don't want your kid to see pornography, how about being a decent parent. The government isn't- and shouldn't be- a fucking babysitter.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 10:10am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "We" as a society should probably leave the parenting up to the actual parents.

          Last thing we need is some pompous prick running around plugging random holes.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          John Fenderson (profile), 30 Oct 2015 @ 11:11am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "you're saying we shouldn't bother at all?"

          Depends on who you mean by "we". Concerned parents can install their own controls. But should the law require ISPs to do this? No.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 2:11pm

      Re:

      He is a modern Mary Winehouse. Guess Pink Floyd has some salient words for him/her.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2015 @ 5:15pm

      Re:

      Anyone who claims to care about children's wellbeing and gives birth to children in this country, clearly don't care about their wellbeing.

      It's just sadistic.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:18pm

    You missed the newsworthy bit: David Cameron read the Daily Mail, this explains so much...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ruby, 29 Oct 2015 @ 12:45pm

    This is about the pig, isn't it. It all started when he heard a book was being written about his adventures with the pig.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 1:08pm

    Can't have any Cameron Internet pig porn popping up, think of the children.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    annonymouse, 29 Oct 2015 @ 1:14pm

    pigs fly the concord

    Already knowing how these filters have been put to use we know that he will continue silencing local disidents and critics by putting them on the list.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 1:15pm

    Do this or...we'll spy on you? Since that's "allowed" now and all.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mark Wing, 29 Oct 2015 @ 2:18pm

    I'm sure they can massage the definition of net neutrality to suit their shenanigans. They could even hire a PR firm and call it something different like Net Awesomeness.

    "Net neutrality, now with 20% more sprinkles!"

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    LeeJS (profile), 29 Oct 2015 @ 2:48pm

    I don't understand the problem? If you don't want it just opt out. Simple.

    If it stops the children of just one lazy/ignorant parent accidentally viewing porn then it will be useful. This is what society should be about: protecting its most vulnerable citizens when they're unable to protect themselves.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:03pm

      Re:

      The chances of it achieving that are about the same as the system not blocking sites useful to kids, that is zero.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:06pm

      Re:

      "If it stops the children of just one lazy/ignorant parent accidentally viewing porn then it will be useful."

      God forbid a kid see a breast or a penis.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 4:07pm

        Re: Re:

        Unless of course it is a politician's then they fall over themselves to cover it up

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 4:51pm

      Re:

      I don't think porn is something that children are "unable" to protect themselves from. "Unwilling" maybe.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 2:55pm

    ...so that our children will be protected.
    Cameron really doesn't understand the internet, does he? The only linguistic purpose that any variant of "for the children" can now serve is that of punchline. There is no way the phrase can currently be used that won't elicit laughter.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 3:13pm

    Maybe someone misheard and Cameron was asked why he watches porn at number 10 when he said 'for the children'.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 4:06pm

    I guess he trusted what he was being told without bothering to fact check before he signed off on it.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mark Wing, 29 Oct 2015 @ 4:57pm

    A co-worker once asked me what she could do to prevent her 15 year old son from finding porn on the Internet, and I said "Have you considered acceptance?"

    At least I kept that stuff mostly off my home network with all the kids. Being a computer expert, it was a viable bluff when I told the kids that I had a packet sniffer running on the network at all times, which told me the sites they were visiting. I think they believed that into their 20s, when they correctly guessed I was too lazy and called me on it.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Oct 2015 @ 11:47pm

    Politics

    This is the thing about politics, at least in the UK: Cameron couldn't give a damn about porn, or protecting anyone from it - he just wants to look as if he does, because he thinks it will make him popular. So, who cares whether the filters work? Not him.

    And not me, since they seem to be so ineffective that I have circumvented them by accident...?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 5:39am

    "When I read my Daily Mail this morning, I sputtered over my cornflakes because we worked so hard to put in place these filters," he told fellow MPs.

    @ David Cameron: There's your problem, Oinky, deal with that. And by "That" I mean "Stop reading a paper that regularly makes things up."

    Well now we know where he gets his policy ideas from. *Eyeroll*

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 7:39am

    "so that our children will be protected"

    ha ha ha

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    normal bloke, 30 Oct 2015 @ 7:59am

    Lol

    Hey, lets filter porn cos sex is bad!!!!!
    Hey Dad this picture of a man chopping off another mans head is so OK, after all its not porn.
    Can we watch Rambo 1 to 5 again tonight?
    No son we watched them last week! Put on Pirhanna 3DD, but make sure you cover your eyes when the boobie scenes come on!!!
    Awww! Dad!!!!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2015 @ 3:00pm

    Wouldn't somebody think of those poor pigs that suffer sexual abuse from future politicians?!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


How The EU's Proposed New 'Privacy' Rules Will Be A Tool For Massive Censorship
Techdirt Reading List: The Lever of Riches
The European Union's New Net Neutrality 'Protections' Are A Joke
With Another Major Expansion, Google Fiber's Looking Less Like An Adorable Experiment And More Like A Disruptive Broadband Revolution
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

12:15 Courts (Again) Shoot Down Telecom Lobby's Attempt To Kill State-Level Net Neutrality Rules (4)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.