[LINK] Police raid home of Wikileaks.de domain owner over censorship lists

[Leah Manta]

At 11:47 25/03/2009, Kim Holburn wrote:
>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Police_raid_home_of_Wikileaks.de_domain_owner_over_censorship_lists
>Seems possible this is the result of wikileaks publishing the ACMA
>list which included links to sites with child pornography:

[snip] other relevant stuff about Minister and Black Lists.

Books, Magazines, Movies and Video games that are classified RC are 
listed in a public access database.

This means anyone can find out the title of such products that are 
'censored' or 'banned'

I don't think ANYONE objects to the Blacklist being kept secret from 
the perspective of the URLs themselves.

The issue is "What's in the list" to prevent abuse of the list 
listing Dentists and Opposing Political Views and so on.

I feel that if instead of arguing about exposing the list, which then 
makes URLs (that probably change every 48 hours anyway if they are 
porn or child abuse) visible to people to be curious about "to gawk" 
and "rubber neck", why can't everyone focus on a method of giving 
Title to the URLs that are being listed.

A Public Database that lists the:
- DATE of entry into the database,
- classification it would receive (because the URLs are NOT 
classified officially through application, they are just 'presumed to 
receive' a specific classification)
- Title of the page (or site)
- Description of the page or content.  "Bestiality" or "Child Pornography"
- The Geographical location (may be assumption too) of the site
- Reason for Listing  (5 multiple choice options perhaps, I can't 
imagine there would be many variations, but they can always be added.)

I'd then recommend, that any domain name that does not contain 
obvious keywords related to inappropriate sexual content or weapons 
or terrorism or whatever, be provided in the listing.  In most cases 
on the 2nd level and TLD will be required.  Looking over the 
published list I'd feel fairly confident this would be satisfactory.

The result is that people can then check their domain names to see if 
they are listed - by accident or otherwise, and the reasons.  Then a 
Speedy remedy can be applied to have the entry removed from the list.

Domain names like MANY of the ones on the published list are 
blatantly obvious and really don't need to be displayed as they serve 
no purpose to anyone genuinely concerned about social protection.

Social Protection includes not only the Viewer, but the children, 
women, men, animals, and lives of ALL people who could be affected by 
the creation or, action upon or the use of the material published 
under the banned URLs.

Does this make sense or what?

It's simple to activate.  In fact the original complaint for a URL 
could also be anonymously published in the database so we can all see 
the process is in fact working.