[LINK] So what have we done about Melbourne IT's dirty deed

[Howard Lowndes]

Rick Welykochy wrote:
> Anura Samara wrote:
> 
>> Just to keep everyone updated on this (I haven't seen anything from
>> Link but I might have missed out somewhere) ...
>>
>> This morning, Fran Kelly on ABC Radio National had both Richard
>> Neville and Bruce someone-or-other from Melbourne IT on the line.
>>
>> Basically, Ricard pointed out all the right arguments ie. any concerns
>> over copyright, inappropriate content need to be taken up with the
>> appropriate authorities, fair warning to him, etc.
>>
>> Interesting Bruce Someone said that the first report was from the
>> Australian High Tech Crime Unit. When they asked for something in
>> writing, the email came from Dept of Prime Minister & Cabinet with the
>> AHTCC copied in.
>>
>> Now, according to the website, AHTCC defines "high tech crime" as:
>>
>>     * computer intrusions (e.g. malicious hacking)
>>     * unauthorised modification of data, including destruction of data
>>     * denial-of-service (DoS) attacks
>>     * and the creation and distribution of malicious software (e.g.
>> viruses, worms, trojans).
> 
> 
> The excuse was the last item above: Richard's website was deemed
> to be a phishing attempt. This accusation was the wild conclusion that
> people would mistakenly think thet are reading the PM's own website
> and ... and ... and what -- mistakenly enter confidential information
> to the non-exsistent forms on the single web page that is found there?
> 
> If this is the technical quality of high-tech crime investigation
> and prosecution in this country, I'm heading for Canada.


No point in doing that - they won't have a bar of "hell" there...

> 
> 
> 
>> Given that Richards spoof site met none of these criteria, just why
>> was AHTCC involved in the first place? I can only assume that getting
>> a call from this mob would certainly put you on edge.
>>
>> If you were paranoid, you could say that Weetbix Johnny is getting a
>> law enforcement agency to shut down criticism or satire he doesn't
>> like.
> 
> 
> No paranoia required. This is indeed exactly what has happened.
> The Prime Minister's dept explicitly requested that the domain be
> taken down without contacting Mr Neville and without following
> proscribed procedures established by both Melbourne IT and
> ICANN.
> 
> Fran Kelly's piece this morning also mentioned that Melbourne IT
> admits is breached established protocols and now regrets the
> moves it took.
> 
> Now, the domain is back in the system and http://johnhowardpm.org/
> takes you to:
> 
> http://richardneville.com/
> 
> via an HTTP redirect.
> 
> Now the question arises: how on earth can the AHTCC or the Prime
> Minister or Melbourne IT force someone to issue an HTTP redirect
> from one site to another? And how can they stop a certain "look
> and feel" being duplicated for satirical purposes from being
> published?
> 
> Anyway, have a read on the Richard's home page for all the salient
> points he raises about the domain being quashed. The main point
> is: he has not broken any laws, and due process is required if
> the owner of the site he has lampooned feels a transgression has
> occurred.
> 
> So far, due process has been denied. If Mr Neville has no legal
> recourse to the illegal actions taken against him, we are evidently
> entering the realm of the police state, where law enforcement
> agencies are beholden to the agendas and whims of the executive.
> 
> Can Mr Neville and we the Internet users of this country
> expect an apology and explanation from both the AHTCC and the
> Prime Minister?
> 
> Did I hear somebody "whinging" about the lack of a Bill Of Rights
> for Australia just the other day? And didn't I also here a certain
> minister in the ranks of the higher level of government reply that such
> a bill is unnecessary, since the court can sort out any such problems?
> (Anyone see the tautology in the reply?)
> 
> A final question: do we in Australia really have the right of freedom
> of speech and of the press? I do not think so -- not enshrined in law.
> We are so innoculated with an overdose of American TV and cinema that
> we often mistakenly think we have the rights enjoyed by the Americans.
> Which of course is patently false, much to our deteriment.
> 
> 
> cheers
> rickw
> 
> 

-- 
Howard.
LANNet Computing Associates - Your Linux people <http://lannetlinux.com>
When you want a computer system that works, just choose Linux;
When you want a computer system that works, just, choose Microsoft.
-- 
Flatter government, not fatter government; abolish the Australian states.