From: apache@gargoyle.apana.org.au
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 13:13:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Australia to Censor the Net
Message-ID: <199707220504.PAA17769@gargoyle.apana.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc.        

                    Media Release                  July 20th 1997

GOVT INTERNET PROPOSALS -- THREAT TO FREE SPEECH; BURDEN ON ISPS 

Online civil liberties group Electronic Frontiers Australia has warned
that the proposals for Internet regulation released this week by the
Minister for Communications and the Arts, Senator Alston, and the
Attorney-General, Mr Williams, would threaten free speech and place an
impossible burden on Internet service providers.

EFA Chair Kimberley Heitman said the Government had done well to avoid
the totalitarian censorship recommendations of the Senate Select
Committee in its June 1997 report.  However the proposals were still
"an unnecessary intrusion by Big Brother".

There are several problems with the suggested principles for
legislation.

The principles make Internet Service Providers (ISPs) responsible for
content created and published by others.  "It is quite simple.", said
Mr Heitman. "Content providers should be responsible for content.  The
whole concept of making service providers responsible for content is
bizarre. It is as senseless as making paper-makers responsible for
books published using their paper".

The principles require ISPs to make judgements about how material
published by their users would be classified by the Office of Film and
Literature Classification.  "The recent Rabelais case in the Federal
Court illustrates the complexity of the OFLC classification system",
said Mr Heitman.  "But now ISPs, whose skills are primarily technical,
are expected to enter the legal minefield of censorship
classification. This is an extraordinary burden which can only result
in perfectly legal material being removed 'just in case'."

The principles do not explain how jurisdictional issues resulting from
States passing their own censorship laws would be resolved. 
"Requiring ISPs to take into account whether material would 'otherwise
be illegal under a State or Territory law' could be a total nightmare,
especially for national service providers", commented Mr Heitman. "It
would effectively allow individual States to impose their values on
the entire country".

The principles fail to take into account that clearly objectionable
material such as child pornography is already illegal under existing
law, or that the vast bulk of "adult" material is sourced from outside
Australia.  "The Clinton administration in the USA has just abandoned
attempts to regulate the Internet - yet Australia seems to be trying
to do the impossible all by itself", said Mr Heitman.

There is still no evidence that there is any problem for which
legislation of this kind is the solution.  User education and
community awareness are important, but these can not usefully be
compelled by legislation.

ENDS

      --------------------------------------------------------------
      Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc  --  http://www.efa.org.au/
      representing Internet users concerned with on-line freedoms
      --------------------------------------------------------------
      Media Contacts

      Kimberley Heitman
      Phone: +61 8 9458 2790
      Email: kheitman@it.com.au

      Danny Yee
      Phone (home): +61 2 9955 9898
      Phone (work): +61 2 9351 5159
      Email: danny.yee@efa.org.au
      --------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND

DCA principles:
 http://www.dca.gov.au/policy/fwork_4_online_svces/framework.htm

EXERPT:
[snip]
PRINCIPLES FOR A REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR ON-LINE SERVICES IN THE
BROADCASTING SERVICES ACT 1992

1. The Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA) should be amended to
establish a national framework of effective industry self-regulation
for on-line service providers, supervised by the Australian
Broadcasting Authority (ABA), in relation to content transmitted
through on-line networks.

Objectives

2. The regulatory regime should aim to : 

(a) encourage on-line service providers to respect community standards
in relation to material published by means of their service; and

(b) encourage the provision of means for addressing complaints about
content published by means of an on-line services; and

(c) ensure that on-line service providers place a high priority on the
protection of minors from exposure to material which may be harmful to
them.

3. The legislation should encourage the development of self-regulatory
mechanisms and in particular avoid inhibiting the growth and
development of the on-line services industry by placing unreasonable
regulatory constraints on the on-line services provider industry
regarding the publication and transmission of material.

4. The legislation should codify the responsibilities of an on-line
service provider in relation to objectionable content and other
content that is of concern to the community accessed by means of the
on-line service provider's network.
[snip]
-- 
   .////.   .//    Charles Senescall             apache@quux.apana.org.au
 o:::::::::///     apache@bear.apana.org.au  apache@gargoyle.apana.org.au
>::::::::::\\\     Finger me for PGP PUBKEY            Brisbane AUSTRALIA
   '\\\\\'   \\    Apache