Australia Waters Down, Delays Internet Filter Policy

An anonymous reader writes "Looks like Australia's government is running a bit scared of a population enraged by its controversial mandatory filtering project. The Government today announced a suite of measures designed to provide controls around the filter project, including independent oversight and a review of content which would be included. In addition, some Australian ISPs will voluntarily censor any child pornography URLs. But the whole project is still going ahead — it's just been delayed and slightly modified."

Well dont Australia

[CommanderEl]

Massive props to the major ISP's in Australia for standing up and showing the Government with action, what is the best course of action for Australia and it's citizens.
.
It's really disappointing listening to the arguments from the Labor government as to why Australia needs an internet filter. Tugging on the heart strings of the parents promising to "help protect their children" with a defunct solution.
.
I congratulate every Australian working hard to petition and protest about their rights and what is good for Australia. The people have spoken.

Seems like they are putting a frog in hot water

[JDmetro]

and slowly bringing it to a boil.
Seems like that has been happening all over the world the last few years. Phase things in gradually so people don't notice, but always under false pretence. But what does in it matter to the government? There will never be another revolution of any kind because now they have the technology to stop any kind of uprising (isn't the constitution against the government keeping a standing army?)

Re:Well dont Australia

[Fluffeh]

To place a rebuttal on your "but" (FTFA):

The use of a standardised block page notification, which will allow ISPs to notify users that the content that have requested has been blocked, and how to see a review of the block

This I can live with. It basically says:
Yes, the site you wanted exists, but it's on a no-no list, so you can't see it. This is why (link to review of site). Don't agree with the review? Complain.

That seems to be somewhat more "filtering I can live with" even as a pretty outspoken libertarian :)

Everything happened just I have forseen

[mjwx]

For a long time now I've said that this will be kicked around parliament with no real action being taken. Every time KRudd bought it in the last year up he faced a rebellion from the back bench from those MP's who relied on a narrow margin to keep their seats. Gillard has not gone one way or the other remaining ambiguous on the subject (she's a lawyer after all). I don't think Labor needs the fundie vote and Abott is more likely to get the fundies on side with Gillard being "non-religious" but Labor is not willing to alienate any voters at this point in time.

This bill will get kicked around some more and dismissed or watered down so much that it's never truly implemented. With any luck, Conroy will lose his seat in the senate (dearest Victorians, this is your problem, we westies have our hands full supporting the nations economy right now) and a Labor/Green coalition will remain in power. I have no doubt the ACL (Australian Christian Lobby) will pressure Tony Abott to implement some kind of filter if he wins and I don't think Abott has the stones to deny the ACLs request.

Re:Next election will be crucial

[MichaelSmith]

Better the devil you know. Give labour a slap in the upper house then put them ahead in the lower house, but behind the greens. Thus well trained they will come to heel faster than the liberals. Thats my theory anyway.

Checks and balances

[dimethylxanthine]

Well, at least it's good to hear the concept of "separation of power", as developed by ancient Greeks as a model of democratic governance, is still in full swing downunder! No matter what everyone thinks about filtering and the so called freedom of speech (I personally think we have such an increasing amount of shit in our brains, filtering out child porn isn't going to revolutionize anything, though my take is that it's a good thing). Anyone whining about potential issues with your rights - take a few deep breaths - Australia isn't turning into North Korea overnight - there are more important issues to whine about. Millions of people are being incarcerated, hundreds of thousands are jobless, and more kids than you know are left without parents, which leads me to the conclusion - it's always better to deal with the root of the (perceived) problem.

-----
Realise!

Re:Don't be fooled

[Cimexus]

Agreed. Those opposing the filter (i.e. any thinking person who knows a bit about technology and the Internet) should be pleased with their efforts so far. This is fantastic news ... and it's actually a much bigger backflip than the summary alludes to (for some reason, /. always tends to overstate any 'filtering will happen' news, and understate any 'filtering is looking like it probably won't happen' news - "delayed" in political terms means "possibly never going to happen, depending on feedback we get/election results").

But we have to keep the pressure on the Government.

If we keep the pressure up, this 'delay' will become a 'very long delay' and eventually 'indefinite'. I'm confident already that mandatory filtering will never actually happen in this country (the population are too against it, and rightfully so). It may eventually come to fruition in a watered-down version. But I think that's still a win. I personally have no problems with an opt-in or opt-out filter - so long as users have the choice, there's no harm in that. Even if that extends to whole ISPs - e.g. Telstra and Optus may filter compulsorily, but all the other ISPs out there won't (including those which wholesale Telstra services, which you can get anywhere that you can get Telstra so you will always have another choice).

Re:Well dont Australia

[mjwx]

That seems to be somewhat more "filtering I can live with" even as a pretty outspoken libertarian :)

Except we don't know if the list is secret or not.

Those behind the filter do not want people to know what is being blocked as "it lets people know where child porn is". It's almost as if they have some delusional idea that if people know about child porn they'll instantly become paedophiles. This has the effect of hiding false positives.

Rant aside, all this will end up being is a button on my iinet control panel saying "do you want to take part in voluntary filtering (_)YES (_)NO" and if it becomes a pain the "NO" box will get ticked by default.

Re:Next election will be crucial

[Joakal]

If you really are against Labor, it works better to vote parties that are least for the parties. There's a most opposing parties method [shockseat.com] that will put Labor senators last to get votes so you don't have to understand the big list [abc.net.au] of candidates and preferences.

Disclaimer: My website