🚀 go-pugleaf

afreeman@pcug.org.au (Andrew Freeman) writing in aus.org.acs
wrote:

>> My application to join EFA is in the mail :-)

>EFA is certainly doing excellent work in this area. I hope you will
>continue to remain a member of the ACS as well, and the Economic,
>Legal and Social Implications Committee (ELSIC). I would encourage
>other members of the ACS who are concerned about social implications
>issues such as this to consider joining ELSIC - details on ELSIC are
>at URL:

 Andrew,
 
  I joined the ACS as I'm interested in computers and computer
technology and use it daily. My membership of the ACS is
completely independent of my concerns with regard to freedom of
speech, thought, or the expression of political or sexual
orientation, or the long time use of previously unregulated
bulletin boards and on-line services.

  My application for membership of the EFA is based on my
concerns regarding uniformity of law (there isn't any conformity
within Australia, let alone internationally !! ].  I believe
there should be conformity, not only with regard to "content" but
also with regard to "enforcement"  before bodies such as the OFLC
impose unworkable guidelines, even though much of what they write
appears to attempt to address differing community standards and
recognise the global/intrastate inconsistencies with regard to
the acceptability of content.

  In the absence of intrastate/internationally agreed guidelines
it is impossible for me to determine what is or isn't legal,
either with regard to material available in "cyberspace", or
material advertised on-line - which while legal in it's country
of origin, could be "refused classification" on arrival in
Australia and thus be confiscated as a "prohibited import",
subject to fines for importation.

 I refer to page 32 of the July 97 ACS publication "Information
Age":- 

 "The ACS believes most adult Australians should be able to read,
hear and see whatever they wish unimpeded," says Philip Argy,
head of the economic, legal and social implications of computing
committee of the ACS community affairs board." 

 I personally agree with this statement, and am hence am pleased
to be a member of ELSIC, even though I'm aware that there are
members of the ACS who may disagree with this point of view, and
some who also believe that the ACS shouldn't be involved in "the
political arena" ( a statement made recently at an ACS Special
Interest Group ].
 
 I have been reading some of the recommendations regarding
on-line content issued by the OFLC.
 
 On "Community Standards" and the "RC" classification I have
pointed out many times over the years that material that could
well be "refused classification" is freely on sale in New South
Wales, and has been for many years.  I am also aware that the
police are aware of this, as I have had discussions with them
regarding such material, but the police appear to have mixed
reactions with regard to enforcement.

 Again I have raised this as a topic in various on-line
discussion groups such as "Feminism-In" and the Fidonet "LTUAE"
conference, but the reaction wasn't one of shock and horror, but
generally "so what, I/we believe that adults should be able to
read, view, or hear whatever they wish unimpeded..." 
 
 I have raised this as an issue in private correspondence with
people whom I know to be a members of the EFA ( some of whom were
suggesting I join ) pointing out the nature of some of the
material available, but if this was a matter for concern the
over-riding principle of "adults should be able to read, view or
hear whatever they wish unimpeded" seemed to take precedence over
the (often) potentially offensive content of the material
available.

 As I say I believe the police in New South Wales are aware of
this, but yesterday I could wander into a suburban high street
and find video tapes for sale which almost certainly fall within
the "RC" category.  Despite this, and despite the fact this
material is openly on sale, I noticed people of various walks of
life, including females, peruse the material (none of which
involves pedophilia), and walk out apparently unconcerned.

  If there are major objections to such material, I haven't heard
them being expressed - so in my view the current "community
standards" of New South Wales appear to include "well, this might
be objectionable but it isn't a matter for concern" although "we
object strongly to airport noise..."  :-)

 I notice that these tapes carry web site addresses, and include
FBI warnings as to "infringement of copyright".  It is my belief
that the principle should be that material legal within a country
of origin should also be legal for individuals to view in
Australia, or failing this that there should be globally
recognised guidelines (warnings) as to content rather than
legally imposed sanctions for attempting to read, hear or view
something that a few people in Canberra may find objectionable,
and that the "RC" classification should only apply to material
viewed in a communal environment such as a cinema, rather than
privately.

 I believe the OFLC shouldn't be the arbitrator on what I am able
to view or read....
 
 As to the matter of copyright I am accessing an appropriate Web
Site ( while still available :-) ) and making inquiries as to
whether the material currently on sale in New South Wales
infringes the FBI warnings as to copyright as I believe those who
produce such material, legal in the country of origin - ie the
United States and subject to copyright warnings, should be
compensated by way of royalties, and that the price being
charged in New South Wales may fail to recongise this.
 
 On changing community standards I am reminded that Alan Turing,
a pioneer of computer science, was a homosexual, and was
prosecuted and convicted for homosexuality before taking his life
a year after his conviction.  According to his biography he was
subjected to "hormone therapy" in an attempt to overcome his
alleged "disability", a therapy which apparently resulted in
"growing female breasts", which seemingly upset him.
 
 Today homosexuality is legal in most states of Australia, and
Mr. Turing ( who conceived the concept of  "Turing Machine" and
was involved in cryptography ] could well still be alive, and
contributing to computer science rather than being a convicted
criminal and a pile of ash in a graveyard.

 As for "protecting children" I would point out to the OFLC that
I was once a child myself and my sexual "education" came not from
embarrassed teachers or parents, but from viewing sexual images,
previously banned for many years as 'objectionable' and
'pornographic' and as a result I, as an adult, speaking on my
behalf as a child, object to the assumptions being made by the
OFLC that "children must be protected".
 
                                                  Bob


--
Bob Bain, Sydney, Australia   
bobb@acslink.aone.net.au