🚀 go-pugleaf

aus.censorship added since the ABA people have conveniently 'forgotten' it
again.

On-line Services (online@s054.aone.net.au) tapped out:
: 
: ABA JOINS INTERNATIONAL GROUP ON INTERNET
: CONTENT RATING

*groan* here we go again. You;d think people would have laernt by now,
especially inthe wake of Reno v ACLU.
: 
: 
: "The ABA is particularly pleased a number of key organisations
: have agreed to establish an international working group on
: content rating. The ABA will be a participant in this group,"
: said Mr Peter Webb, ABA Chairman.

Will that involve such 'enlightened' countries as Singapore - which
engages in political censorship of the net?

: The European Commission, in three individual declarations
: by European Ministers, business leaders and users, has
: endorsed the proposed global rating systems as a way of
: empowering users and protecting children. This approach
: has also featured in the statements by the US Secretary of
: Commerce and the Japanese State Secretary for International
: Trade and Industry.

The usual 'save-the-children' cry. What I fail to see is how ratings
empower users. As for protecting children i guess it's too late to point
out that thats what parents are meant to be doing. The other question is
protecting from what? Why does the government get to decide what children
shoudl be protected from on the net?

: 
: "The ABA welcomes this endorsement, and the proposal that
: self-regulation and technical solutions, such as voluntary content
: filtering and rating, should play a central role in content control,"
:  Mr Webb said.

And there's the word I hate. 'Content Control' - ok, its two words. How do
they propose to control content on the net? Who will be responsible and
who's standards? The muslim nation where women have to wear veils or
countries like the US , which, though not perfect, seem at least in their
courts to have some grasp of the idea of freedom of speech.

: "The ABA is concerned with identifying measures which will
: provide children with a protective framework for on-line services
: such as is available in other sectors like broadcasting, cinema
: and video and computer games."

wank, wank wank. I'm sorry, it's late and that's the firts thing that came
to mind. Is this meant to be a seriously informative press release or a
relase to reassure the ignorant that somethng is being done about a
problem which doesn't really exist. As for the protection framework for
computer games - its a joke. It's bad enough that they have to try and
impose some sortof rating scheme (where Panzer General was given an M or
MA for crying out loud), let alone one where there is no adult category. 

: "The ABA has long been taking an active role in worthwhile
: measures for Internet regulation which represent practical
: responses to community concerns," he added. "Flexibility in
: regulatory arrangements needs to be the hallmark of this work."

What community concern? Oh, you must mean the misinformed concern being 
hyped up and spread by the mainstream mass media. I think the 39 out of 45
responses to the senate committee showed that there was a _lot_ more
concern about government censorship of the net than anything else.

: There was broad consensus between European Ministers,
: industries and users on the key issues and solutions for the
: development of on-line services. These issues include safety,
: security, and flexibility of systems and regulation.

Anyone know what these words are meant to mean. IMHo the first two of
these can be provided through freer access to anonymous communication,
stronger privacy laws to protect users from unwanted government and
corporate sniffing and great access to cryptogy, for those how wisely
still don;t trust the government to do the right thing.

: 
: Apart from the ABA, the organisations to be involved in the
: working group on content rating include the Recreational
: Software Advisory Council (USA) and Internet Content Rating
: for Europe (INCORE). INCORE has as its core partners ECO
: Forum (Germany), Internet Watch Foundation (UK) and Childnet
: International (based in UK).
: 

Notice that this cooperative approach which is meantto involve users
doesn't include EFF, EFA, the ACLU or in fact any sort of electronic
rights user groups at all. I;m sure thats more than a co-incidence.

-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Randyte (Heath Gibson)                    c9416574@alinga.newcastle.edu.au

"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
 liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech
 the First Amendment protects."
              			 _ACLU_v_Reno_

++++++++++http://www2.hunterlink.net.au/~ddhrg/randyte.html+++++++++++++++++++