[LINK] Having a look at it is not a crime

[David Boxall]

Now, I'm confused. 
<http://www.canberratimes.com.au/blogs/game-politics/having-a-look-at-it-is-not-a-crime/1471681.aspx?storypage=0>
I can't find a date, but I believe the "last night" mentioned is the Q&A 
program.

Last night Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, 
Communications and the Digital Economy uttered nine words that hold 
enormous implications for Australian internet users. When asked point 
blank would Australian citizens be prosecuted for accessing websites on 
the Australian Communications & Media Authority's leaked blacklist, 
Conroy replied, “Having a look at it is not a crime.”

Let's just let that sink in for a moment. The federal minister, who 
oversees enforcement of internet law, has declared publicly that viewing 
sites deemed dangerous to the public is not a crime.

The leaking of the ACMA's so-called blacklist by political advocacy 
site, Wikileaks, has again highlighted the keystone-cops state of 
affairs in Australian online censorship arrangements.

The list was first labelled a fake by a spokesperson for Senator 
Conroy's department. Then it was announced linking to the list, or sites 
on the list, could attract a fine of $11,000. But if the list was a 
fake, how could linking it attract sanctions? Later it was revealed that 
the list was not a fake, but the actual ACMA blacklist to which 
'someone' had added a few extra sites.

So after much confusion it was established that the government's not-so 
secret blacklist of almost-banned websites had been sort-of leaked in an 
unpure form. Confusion reigned again.

Wikileaks German office has been reportedly raided by that countries law 
enforcement agencies in response to the leak. Despite the raid, 
Wikileaks is still online and the notorious blacklist, still accessible. 
After Senator Conroy's statement last night, Australians can now 
research the list, safe in the knowledge that they will not be 
prosecuted for 'having a look.'

Senator Conroy had a lot more to say than just legally green-lighting us 
all to look at some of the worst material the web has to offer. Alluding 
to a new issue that has risen today, Conroy stated “We're talking about 
material the Classifications Board currently makes judgements on.”

No we're not.

The Classifications Board isn't very big. It has neither the time, 
inclination nor jurisdiction to police the web. A site containing Bill 
Henson's controversial photos of nude teenagers was today revealed to be 
on the blacklist. Conroy quickly came out and stated the Classifications 
Board had passed the images and therefore the site would be removed from 
the list. According to Conroy, the system worked.

The only reason Henson's photos were reviewed by the Classifications 
Board was because the government asked them to in wake of last year's 
controversy. Without the controversy, the Classifications Board would 
never have classified the photos, just like the billions of unclassified 
images and videos floating around out there in cyberspace. Who knows 
what status the website containing the photos would have without its 
official pass.

Senator Conroy is being tricky. The Classifications Board is not part of 
his department, nor does it classify in his area. Some of the material 
it does classify is available on the internet, but it is not the same 
thing. Is the Attorney General, who does oversee the Classifications 
Board, aware of Senator Conroy's attempt to pass the buck?

Or is Senator Conroy aware the Classifications Board has already 
attempted the same thing, washing its hands of Massively Multi-player 
Online games, such as World of Warcraft, by declaring them 'inherently 
unclassifiable'? Any queries are quickly rerouted to the Department of 
Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, who then confess to 
know very little about the issue.

 From the punters perspective it's a complete mess. The Government is 
obviously set on its policy of censoring the internet, but has not 
effectively communicated the how and most importantly, the why. The 
issue needs leadership and it needs it fast.

Senator Conroy almost got there last night when he said, “It is possible 
to support a blacklist and support free-speech.” Now he needs to make 
the case. It's not good enough to go on and say, “Publishing the list 
would defeat the purpose of having the list,” and leave it at that. Such 
thinking is incompatible with a Liberal Democracy. Banning Lady 
Chatterley's Lover is one thing. Hiding all evidence of that ban is 
something completely, insidiously different.

-- 
David Boxall | Dogs look up to us
| And cats look down on us
| But pigs treat us as equals
--Winston Churchill