In Australia, banned links could cost $11,000 a day
Submitted by: KnightMare @ 09:54 AM | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 | (url: http://www.smh.co...)
The Australian communications regulator says it will fine people who hyperlink to sites on its blacklist, which has been further expanded to include several pages on the anonymous whistleblower site Wikileaks.
Wikileaks was added to the blacklist for publishing a leaked document containing Denmark's list of banned websites.
The move by the Australian Communications and Media Authority comes after it threatened the host of online broadband discussion forum Whirlpool last week with a $11,000-a-day fine over a link published in its forum to another page blacklisted by ACMA - an anti-abortion website.
"The first rule of censorship is that you cannot talk about censorship," Wikileaks said on its website in response to the ACMA ban.
Category: Technology | 18 Comments
Tags: australia censorship lol
- Comments (18)
I really can't say anything about australia's censorship/ retarted government that hasn't been said before.
you can't control the internet, nobody will stand for it. Its the last place where free speech is possible.
So hypothetically speaking, if we link to that black listed stuff, will it not appear on Berens end?
I don't get it. They're just links. The content is still blocked at the filter, so the request is just hitting the filter and bouncing back, the same as if the address was typed manually.
So... why? What supports an enormous fine for this?
So... why? What supports an enormous fine for this?
Originally posted by KnightMaretheir filter software is crap apparently
Another brilliant government project...
When did state-sponsored censorship become so trendy?
Has Beren explained why it is necessary for the Australian government to protect its citizens from reading the list of websites blacklisted by Denmark?
there's nothing actually being filtered at the moment..
There's some 'trials' going around with laughably small no-name providers, but there's still nothing actually official to say they'll go ahead.
Also - at the moment, the Government has lost the support it needs to get the legislation through our upper house of parliament, so it's highly unlikely they'll be able to get it passed anyway.
There's some 'trials' going around with laughably small no-name providers, but there's still nothing actually official to say they'll go ahead.
Also - at the moment, the Government has lost the support it needs to get the legislation through our upper house of parliament, so it's highly unlikely they'll be able to get it passed anyway.
Asked an Aussie friend about it and he pointed me to this:
iiNet pulls out of net censorship trials
iiNet pulls out of net censorship trials
I wonder of the Aussies have to say that their country is great under penalty of fine of imprisonment.
Because it sure as fuck doesn't sound so great.
Because it sure as fuck doesn't sound so great.
I suppose they are just used to this sort of thing.
It's probably standard procedure in a penal colony.
Login to comment.
It's probably standard procedure in a penal colony.