Weather | TV Guide | Horoscopes | Competitions

Hotmail
Messenger
Mobile

Street protests planned over internet filtering

Send to a friend

Angus Kidman03 December 2008, 9:00 AM

Protests against plans to censor Australia's internet feeds are moving from online to the physical world, with a series of street protests planned.

The street protests are planned in all states for Saturday December 13, and are being organised by the Digital Liberty Coalition.

The NoCensorship.info site, set up Digital Liberty Coalition, is being used as a central organising point for the protests, which have been set to take place in CBD locations at lunchtime in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide and Hobart at 11.00am.

The group promises various interesting speakers will be addressing the rallies -- including members of parliament and a Greens senator.

Similar protests were organised by Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) back in 1996 to protest against plans by the then Liberal government to try and block illegal content via new Internet censorship laws. While that legislation went through, its impact has been decidedly muted, in part because of the comparatively minute number of addresses that have ended up on the blacklist used for illegal sites. The newly-proposed scheme is much broader in scope.

Exact plans and implementation dates for the government's so-called "clean feed" remain uncertain, but testing is due to take place with a number of ISPs. Chief amongst the arguments against the plan are the detrimental effect it will have on connection speeds (doubly ironic given the government's plans to fund a massive increase in broadband speed), and the lack of clear information on just what will be blocked.

The online Save The Net petition set up by activist group GetUp has already attracted more than 55,000 signatures, according to organisers. However, online petitions are often ignored by governments, and don't guarantee a berth on the evening news — a much more likely prospect on a slow news Saturday.

Senator Stephen Conroy, the minister charged with implementing the plan, has consistently dismissed protestors on the grounds that they are not interested in helping protect children, but has failed to answer any of the criticisms of the proposal. Conroy's claims that similar schemes are already in place in Europe have also been extensively criticised, with an EFA analysis highlighting numerous differences in approach.

Comments

RSS feed

Email alert

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Conroy's claims that similar schemes are already in place in Europe

Thats odd when The European Parliament recently passed a proposal to treat Internet censorship by repressive regimes as a trade barrier.

03 December 2008, 9:59 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Camios (New user):

Also worth mentioning the EFA's site http://www.nocleanfeed.com

03 December 2008, 10:28 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

pmx (User):

I hope the cops are taking names of the petitioners and protestors. I reckon they'll be able to bag quite a few perverts and pirates in that lot.

03 December 2008, 11:59 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

todd_h86 (Cornerstone member):

Quoting pmx:
hope the cops are taking names of the petitioners and protestors. I reckon they'll be able to bag quite a few perverts and pirates in that lot.

Cause only perverts and pirates will be affected with this filter..... did you just wake up from under a rock mate? READ UP ON IT YOU TOSS POT! Also since when has being a perv been illegal? If they are over 18 and consenting..... Might as well say the cops should take names of people who protest offshore bank accounts being made illegal, they must all be tax cheats...... go back to your hick religous sect and stay there

03 December 2008, 12:39 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

NetR@nger (User):

Mate Your so stupid that u dont even know your stupid(the worlds most dangerous people).Its going to SLOW DOWN everyones internet,you fool.

04 December 2008, 11:49 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

nutter (New user):

Quoting pmx:
I hope the cops are taking names of the petitioners and protestors. I reckon they'll be able to bag quite a few perverts and pirates in that lot.

Oh my god this net filter is not going to stop perverts and pirates. People are protesting for their rights and internet filtering is a violation of peoples rights. Also not forgetting to mention its going to cripple the internet as well. No good is going to come of the clean feed system at all. Clean feed is utter rubbish and should be struck off completely and its a waste of tax payers money. I say people go out and fight! Lets not let these morons tell us what we can and cannot view on the internet and cause it to be more expensive and slow it down. And its the parents duty to provide supervision and their own free to download filtering on their computers. Not a one filter that fits all.

03 December 2008, 1:38 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Halcon (Advanced member):

This is the most arrogant and stupid reaction of a government hell bent on create another repressive regime.
Labour party is similar to the Communist party in terms of utter ignorance.

03 December 2008, 12:28 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

djackmanson (New user):

Thanks very much for plugging the rallies. There's also a YouTube ad for the rallies that people can post to blogs etc. It's at: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPBdWjIrUn4

@pmx, there are plenty of people against the Government's Internet filtering proposals who take child protection seriously. There are better ways to protect children from the bad things they might see online:

1) Be open with them so they'll be happy to tell you about what they see.

2) Move the computer into the loungeroom so you can see what they are up to.

3) Use filtering software or websites that let you control what kids see.

4) Fund the cops who hunt online predators, instead of censoring the Internet for everyone.

03 December 2008, 12:45 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

If I lived in one of the cities they were doing this in, I'd be there without a doubt. Unfortunately I'm 600km away, so it's a bit of a trek.
I hope they get a nice solid turnout to show the media and government that it's an unwanted "solution".

03 December 2008, 1:49 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Kelly12345 (New user):

Ummm maybe you should READ the nocleanfeedforum.com before you state in an article that they're orchestrating the national rallies.

www.nocensorship.info (Digital Liberty Coalition) is the umbrella group for every site but VIC. That site is the central organising point.

To email your states organisers, they can be reached via:
tas-organiser@nocensorship.info
qld-organiser@nocensorship.info
nsw-organiser@nocensorship.info
sa-organiser@nocensorship.info
wa-organiser@nocensorship.info

Or post on the nocensorship.info for up to date rally information.

03 December 2008, 2:35 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

sydcamera29 (New user):

Quoting Kelly12345:
www.nocensorship.info (Digital Liberty Coalition) is the umbrella group for every site but VIC.

Are the DLC looking for an organiser in Melbourne? I'm down there often for work, very often, and have a few decades experience in direct action / activism and have quite a little black book handy for organising spectacles? (:

03 December 2008, 5:09 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Kelly12345 (New user):

From what i can see, Melbourne is a separate chapter to the DLC at this time and do their planning at www.nocleanfeedforum.com and the organisers are not experienced in any forms of activism so maybe you'll have some knowledge worth sharing? :) The facebook event i saw had over 1000+ confirmed iirc so I guess they'd love to get more helpers anyway.

05 December 2008, 4:01 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

sydcamera29 (New user):

Excellent article and good on the DLC folks for taking it to the streets! I met them at their first rally in November in Sydney and had a chat with them about the constitutional validity of the legislation, they're taking a legal approach but using grass roots for informing the public and getting pressure on the government to do the right thing.

I look forward to seeing all us internet lurkers out there Saturday week, just say g'day to the bearded photo journo if you see him! :)

03 December 2008, 4:49 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

sydcamera29 (New user):

Found links to each cities rally here: - http://tinyurl.com/nocleanfeed

03 December 2008, 5:06 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

parentalrights (New user):

raising children and teaching them how to behave and providing them with the protection they need till they are old enough and experienced enough is a family issue not a government issue. those who want their childred raised by government should never have had children in the first place.

03 December 2008, 7:57 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

JesseR (New user):

I live a long way away but I think I may just make the trip for this one. This is purely about setting up the legislation to block sites the government don't like. It won't actually stop the sort of things they claim to be targetting because the paedophiles will simply use a proxy to bypass the blacklist. A simple google will find heaps of those, it isn't brain surgery. And anyway, if this is blacklist is a list of illegal child porn sites why aren't they reporting them to the federal police or interpol? Anybody that thinks this legislation is about "thinking of the children" is as naive as the children the govt are CLAIMING to be concerned about. This legislation is purely about government control of free access to information - immigrate to China where you belong Conroy, I'm sure the protestors will all chip in for the air fare.

03 December 2008, 11:09 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

NiceTry (New user):

"Chief amongst the arguments against the plan are the detrimental effect it will have on connection speeds...and the lack of clear information on just what will be blocked."

Ah, chief against the *good* arguments against the plan!
Unfortunately, a lot of people planning to protest have no idea what the filtering plan actually is (except that it's a bad thing) and will just keep bleating on about torrents being blocked (technically impossible under the scope of the plan), political views being blocked (illegal) or whatever other misinformation they've picked up - largely thanks to the the DLC themselves and their zero-credibility banners. Just check your local train station/university campus/wherever they're spamming tomorrow. I'm not joking.

"People are protesting for their rights and internet filtering is a violation of peoples rights."

Under which law exactly? With the exception of political expression, there is no freedom of speech in Australia. Perhaps there should be, but there isn't, so this is a dead end argument. The right of adults to hear, read and see what they like is *generally* respected, but is explicitly limited by "community standards".

I'm against the filter (at least in its current form) but I really hope those attending the protests pull their heads out of their fantasy world, and fast. Otherwise the protests will lose credibility very, very, *very* quickly once the government shows their hand.

03 December 2008, 11:40 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

JesseR (New user):

The lack of legislated rights is exactly what is bad about this proposed legislation. Look at the wording of it; it opens the door to block anything they godamn like. We are supposed to trust that this and all subsequent governments won't take advantage of the broad terms of reference in the bill to block things that conflict with their particular interests (or the lobby groups behind them)? You can't trust politicians as far as you can spit a very large rat. There are no safeguards in the form of civil rights to prevent abuse of this legislation, it opens the door to far greater intrusions into our ability to freely gain access to information. Interfering with internet speed is bad enough but we need to put a stop to inroads into this type of censorship asap. We have very little rights so we have to fight things on a case by case basis and this is a test case.
I do whoever agree with you wholeheartedly that protesters need to get the facts straight. The facts are adequate to be going on with as they are.

04 December 2008, 1:31 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

NiceTry (New user):

(double post)

03 December 2008, 11:49 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Earl Blennerhassett (New user):

FACTS: The People (us), DON'T WANT IT, but Conroy is deternined! WHY? Maybe an informative quote from the past can help us work this one out. Please Read!

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty, and almost any deprivation." ~Adolf Hitler.

Some of us, Senator Conroy, have got our eyes WIDELY OPEN to ulterior motives and agendas. Nice try!

04 December 2008, 7:20 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Earl Blennerhassett (New user):

(double post)

04 December 2008, 7:25 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Joejoeinc (New user):

A quote i heard today reminded me of exactly why we shouldn't have a forced internet filter "The preferences of the few should not partial the freedoms of the many." education should be the priority before government internvention (http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,,23272997-5014108,00.html).

04 December 2008, 8:37 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend

DuckMan (New user):

Internet censorship will protect children in the same way that Banning Sex education in US schools prevents teenage pregnancy
(for those who still don't get the message This stupid Idea will cause more harm (TO Children espcially) than good!)

04 December 2008, 1:16 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend