[LINK] Google soon to be banned in Australia under draconian censorship laws

[Marghanita da Cruz]

rene wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:02:03 +0100, Kim Holburn wrote:
> 
>> http://www.inquisitr.com/20245/google-soon-to-be-banned-in-australia-
>> under-draconian-censorship-laws/
>>> Google soon to be banned in Australia under draconian censorship
>>> laws
> 
> Scary story, but not much if any fact in it.
> 
> For a start, the Internet censorship legislation excludes: 
> 
>       (l)  an exempt Internet directory service; or 
>       (m)  an exempt Internet search engine service; or
> 
> which would, under the legislated definitions of those exempt things, most 
> certainly exclude Google.
> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/bsa1992214/sch7.html
> 
>>> If I was linking to XYZ blog, and XYZ blog was linking to ABC blog
>>> who had linked to the list, all the pages in the chain are illegal,
>>> because each one links to prohibited content. Any site linking to
>>> me then becomes illegal, and so on.
> 
> On the basis of a detailed analysis of Sch 7 of the BSA, imo that's an 
> exaggeration. 
> 
> The BSA does not make pages 'illegal' merely because they contain a link to 
> a URL on ACMA's blacklist or link to any other page that does. ACMA can 
> order a content host, if in Australia, to delete a link on a page to a URL 
> on its (secret) blacklist, not order take down/deletion of the whole page 
> containing such a link. In addition, no ISP/content host is in breach of 
> the BSA merely because their servers host a page that contains a link to 
> so-called 'prohibited content' identified by the ACMA. They are required to 
> delete a link if and only if they receive a 'link deletion notice' from the 
> ACMA (and have until 6pm the next business day to comply with the notice).
> 
> Also, link deletion notices do not apply to links contained in pages that 
> are hosted outside Australia.
> 
> There is a vast amount about existing AU Net censorship laws worthy of 
> criticism, including 'link deletion notices' that came into existence from 
> 20 January 2008. However, grossly exaggerating ACMA's powers in relation to 
> link deletion notices is not helpful - and it's a massive distraction from 
> the fact that ACMA is empowered to order takedown of web pages deemed MA15+ 
> to RC inclusive if hosted in Australia or add such pages to its blacklist 
> if hosted o/s.
> 
<snip>

I did wonder how search engines would be affected.

Do blacklists apply to robots? Search engines do index content that is not
accessible without passwords.

Which would bring us back to the idea of opt in/white listing approach - eg
Google's safe search.
<http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35892>

ACMA's info on prohibited content:
>  Under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, the following categories of online content are prohibited:
> 
>     * Any online content that is classified RC* or X 18+* by the Classification Board (formerly the Office of Film and Literature Classification). 
...
> # Content which is classified R 18+* and not subject to a restricted access system that prevents access by children. 
...
> Content which is classified MA 15+*, provided by a mobile premium service or a service that provides audio or video content upon payment of a fee and that is not subject to a restricted access system. 
...
>  * Classifications are based on criteria outlined in the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005.
<http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/1001/pc=PC_90102>

Marghanita
-- 
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202