Australia to enforce a "ratings system" on web, track users (was Re: [LINK] Has anyone seen this...)

[Irene Graham]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 09:30:03 +1100, Daniel Rose wrote:

> Irene Graham wrote:
>
>
> However, the rules do not apply to all
>> commercial MA15+ content, they apply when:
>>
>> "20 (1) (c)  all of the following conditions are satisfied: (i)  the
>> content has been classified MA 15+ by the Classification Board [or if
>> not classified there is "a substantial likelihood" that the content
>> would be classified MA15+];
>> (ii)  access to the content is not subject to a restricted access
>> system; (iii)  the content does not consist of text and/or one or
>> more still visual images;
>> (iv)  access to the content is provided by means of a content service
>> (other than a news service or a current affairs service) that is
>> operated for profit or as part of a profit-making enterprise; (v)
>> the content service is provided on payment of a fee (whether
>> periodical or otherwise);
>> (vi)  the content service is not an ancillary subscription television
>> content service;"
>
>
> I may be misunderstanding here, but what is a 'restricted access
> system'? If username/password qualify then most fee-paying services
> have such a scheme in place already, 

A restricted access system can be username/password, but it can also be any 
system that restricts access to persons who have previously applied (and 
met the access criteria). The ACMA documents provide an example of systems 
"operating in the mobile premium services sector which recognise the MSISDN 
of an applicant's telephone service". (An ACMA Determination for mobile 
premium services and a related industry code, have been in place since 
about 2005, but AFAIK there weren't really any penalties for 
non-compliance, and the EM to the 2007 Act says one of the reasons for it 
is to "to strengthen the ability of the scheme to respond to repeated and 
deliberate offences" although I can't see anywhere in it that says or 
implies they know of any such offences).

>so AFAICT the biggest sector this
> will affect is the "download breasts to your mobile phone" services.

Yes, in my view, that is what the MA15+ provisions are principally aimed 
at. Reasons for that view are:

- there's a difference between MA15 and MA15+. The former means not 
suitable for persons under 15, while the latter means persons between 15 
and 18 not permitted to view (e.g. in a cinema) unless accompanied by an 
adult (which is meant to be a parent or guardian). Generally speaking, the 
type of content that would result in MA15+, not MA15, is content containing 
frequent and/or detailed nudity, or frequent strong/high level violence. 

- the 2007 Bill/Act was actually the government's reaction to "convergent 
devices". The Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill discusses "the problem" at 
length and says, for example:

====
"24. Existing arrangements for content regulation in Australia have been
based on certain assumptions about how content is accessed and viewed.
For example, that broadcasting content was watched on a large bulky
device in the lounge room, enabling easy parental supervision; Internet
content on a desktop computer and telephone sex services via the home
telephone. Until now, mobile phones which may be less amenable to
parental supervision, were unable to provide access to audiovisual
material.

25.   Convergent content services undercut these assumptions. A consumer
with a single convergent communications device could access a premium
voice service, a telephone sex service, a premium mobile service (text or
audiovisual content) and Internet content. The platform specific nature
of the current arrangements for content regulation mean that there would
be differences in the regulation of each of these services."
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/bill_em/clasb2007554/memo_0.html
===

> Perhaps this is specifically targeted legislation, arising from
> complaints about these 'services'.

I don't think it's a response to complaints because this legislation has 
been coming for a long time - it follows DCITA's "Review of the Regulation 
of Content Delivered over Convergent Devices" which started in May 2004 and 
the final report was published in April 2006. 
http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/39890/Final_Convergent_Devic
es_Report.pdf
There was also a similar review done in about 2000 at which time IIRC it 
was decided it was not necessary to do anything yet.

Imo it's "fortunate" that the 2007 Act limited the damage to adults' 
freedom to read see and hear what want (without first identifying themself) 
to a fairly narrow sub-set of MA15+ content. However, what continues to be 
of concern is how far Australian governments will go (eventually) in 
reducing such freedom to a lowest common denominator due to "convergent 
devices" or any other technological developments.

Irene