StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Recent action by the Australian Government may see Google and many other popular websites banned in Australia under existing censorship laws.

Under the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Act 2007 sites that link to content that is Refused Classification (RC) are considered themselves to be RC, and if hosted in Australia, site owners can be ordered to remove the link(s), or fined AU$11,000 a day.

The problem is that the provisions potentially make most sites on the internet illegal. Take for example the leaked Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) blacklist on Wikileaks we wrote about earlier. Given that the list was published after ACMA banned a similar list from Denmark, it’s fair to say that linking to the Australian list will be illegal as well from Australia. Note at this point that the content in the list consists entirely of URLs and does not in itself publish pictures or video; under the act, the links in the list are illegal content (RC) because of what they link to. Likewise, linking to that list is illegal because the list itself is now illegal. Any site that links to the list of links then becomes prohibited content. Most sites would have a front page with internal links, so any page on a site that links to the post that links to the list of links becomes illegal. Keeping up?

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.

But it gets better, because it took 1 second for me to bring up a page in Google which links to the Denmark list. If the Denmark list is prohibited content, then Google is in breach of the act as well, and could well end up being banned. And that’s before you even consider that Google itself takes copies of pages through Google Cache (I’m not allowed to link to it, but it is there, in full in Google.)

This is the stupidity of what is essentially a thought crime: criminalizing a list of links which are text and do not in themselves constitute child porn or other physical illegal activity. The law sets off a chain that could potentially result in most, if not all of the internet in Australia being banned by the Government.

Sounds extreme? well so is making laws that say sites are refused classification for a link and not content. Fascism in Australia has a very wide bow.

Shit, what I knew about the current Australian Federation government's plans for mandatory (so much for people being able to opt-out) ISP-level filter was bad enough. To find out how incompetent they are in managing their blacklist, and the potentially far reaching powers they gave themselves to control Australia's access to the Internet... Bloody hell, I just hope I'm being pessimistic when I get visions of websites that are critical of the Kruddy misgovernment getting slipped into the blacklists.

• online poker sites
• YouTube links
• regular gay and straight porn sites
• Wikipedia entries
• euthanasia sites
• fringe religious sites
• fetish sites
• Christian sites
• a tour operator
• a dentist
• school canteen consultant
• animal carers
• web hosting and web design company

Glimmervoid wrote:Wait, they fine you for linking to black list sites and they will not tell you what is on the black list?

bobalot wrote:Australian democracy is not under attack. Engaging in gigantic hyperbole is fucking retarded. I'm just waiting for some moron to compare Australia to some authoritarian shithole.

The Romulan Republic wrote: How is banning almost the entire internet, and creating a blacklist that nobody can access, with no oversight, not a threat to democracy? I'm not saying the government of Australia is plotting their imminent takeover, but this is pretty bloody outrageous, and things like this will make it easier for someone else to turn the country into a dictatorship down the line.

The Romulan Republic wrote:

bobalot wrote:Australian democracy is not under attack. Engaging in gigantic hyperbole is fucking retarded. I'm just waiting for some moron to compare Australia to some authoritarian shithole.

How is banning almost the entire internet, and creating a blacklist that nobody can access, with no oversight, not a threat to democracy? I'm not saying the government of Australia is plotting their imminent takeover, but this is pretty bloody outrageous, and things like this will make it easier for someone else to turn the country into a dictatorship down the line.

bilateralrope wrote:Since a site that links to a banned site is also a banned site. and this chain has no maximium length, how many government websites will be blocked under this law ?

Or would a better questions be "How many Australian governments will remain legal under this law ?"

Is the family first website allowed ?

bobalot wrote:*For the non-Australians on this board, WorkChoices were new Labor laws

Stofsk wrote:

bobalot wrote:*For the non-Australians on this board, WorkChoices were new Labor laws

I think you mean 'labour' not 'Labor'. Labor is short for the ALP, who most assuredly did not introduce Workchoices, while labour is the Australian/English spelling of the word. The way it reads in the quoted brackets it sounds like they were Labor/ALP laws, if you follow.

I only nitpick because it was Howard's baby, and it was introduced when the Coalition was in government, and like you said it was responsible for Howard's demise and the lovely Chairman Rudd taking over. I'm also nitpicking because I'm bored.

Stark wrote:It continues to amuse me that people still think this will happen. It'd be funny to see them turn it on, cripple Australian business and bankrupt corps, and then hurriedly turn it off again, though.