The issue of a national mandatory ISP-level Internet filtering system being introduced in Australia is of more than passing interest to North Coast Voices and many others in rural and regional areas.Firstly, this blog is administered via a dial-up account and many of our contributors use the same type of Internet connection.
Secondly, all the blog contributors live in regional New South Wales where both broadband and dial-up speeds are already somewhat erratic.
Thirdly, any diminution in Internet function or speed is likely to cripple access to publication on this group blog.
Fourthly, it is beyond the financial capability of this blog to switch to a more expensive (and it must be said, regionally unreliable) broadband connection.
So before the Christmas Eve starting deadline for the Federal Government's trial of the Rudd-Conroy Great Firewall of Australia; would those ISPs who have lodged expressions of interest concerning participation in this censorship trial please put up their hands (I know that some ISPs will have approached the relevant government department because the 18 November EOI deadline has past).
For its own satisfaction North Coast Voices would like to identify those ISPs which think that:
a) the 475 online content complaints, acted on by ACMA in 2007-08 (which related to content that was prohibited or potentially prohibited under the Broadcasting Services Act and including some overseas online gambling sites ) are reason enough to introduce mandatory Internet censorship to this country;
b) indiscriminately blocking up to 10,000 sites identified by ACMA on a 'blacklist'( which may contain lawful content) is a reasonable thing to interpose between the ISP-User contract;
c) taking part in the trial of a filtering system which one of its supporters admits can only potentially block 30-40% of all p*rn sites (and won't block those who regularly access this type of online content) is justified at any level;
d) participating in a 6 week trial that will without consultation impose on the client a combination of dynamic analysis filtering, IP versus URL filtering and DNS poisoning etc., is in the best interests of their business;
e) existing ISP clients will meekly accept any additional account charge allowed under the trial's Draft Deed of Agreement;
f) customers who are negatively impacted by this trial are actually going to use snail mail to inform ISPs that their Internet connection is crippled, rather than just voting with their feet and moving to an ISP not taking part in Senator Conroy's madness; or
g) that Senator Conroy will still respect them in the morning.
Pic from Cleanfeed
- ACMA Annual Report 2007-08
- Internet Service Provider Content Filtering Pilot: Technical Testing Framework, November2008
- Draft Deed of Agreement for Filtering Pilot
- Filter supporters talk, Australia listens
- Cleanfeed at Whirlpool
- ACMA and filtering history at Libertus
- Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
No comments:
Post a Comment