RE: Censorship in Western Australia

[Declan McCullagh <declan@eff.org>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 1996 21:59:33 +1100
From: Irene Graham <rene@pobox.com>
To: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Australia drafts Net rating system

On Mon, 4 Nov 1996 18:53:24 -0800 (PST), Declan McCullagh <declan@eff.org>
wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
[...]
>http://www.smh.com.au/computers/news/961105-news03.html
[...]
>Under the code, which is being developed by the
>Internet Industry Association of Australia (INTIAA),
>content will be classified under the existing code used
>by the Office of Film and Television Classification.
>"R" or "X" rated material would have to be clearly
>identified and provided only to registered subscribers.
[...]

The subject line of this thread is misleading, which is understandable
given the content of the newspaper report. "Australia" is not drafting a
Net rating system (yet anyway). I doubt INTIAA actually is either.

INTIAA purports to be (i.e. wants to be) the "peak Internet industry body"
in Australia. However their code *does not* have the support of much of the
"industry". The present stage of the fight in Australia is, not against
government censorship, but against "privatised" censorship.

There is presently no Net content rating system based on the OFLC
classifications, nor with any luck is there likely to be. The Australian
Broadcasting Authority (ABA) in its July report on Net regulation was of
the view that that system is unworkable for on-line content (which is
correct) and proposed the development of a purpose-built classification
system. Unfortunately it appears the director(s) of INTIAA have not read
that report. 

The following extract from Electronic Frontiers Australia's response (of 22
Oct 96) to the ABA report tells the rest of the story about INTIAA and its
code:

	"It appears that the ABA has been influenced by a particularly
complicated proposed industry code of practice drafted by Patrick Fair of a
Sydney corporation "The Internet Industry Association of Australia".  That
proposed code of conduct, released on the 10th September 1996, proposes a
top-heavy industry body, drawing extensive levies from the Internet access
providers in order to sustain a professional council as well-funded and
well-staffed as a national professional body.  INTIAA was established with
board members representing hardware and software vendors, a national law
firm and several large Internet access providers.  Other members of the
company include media and the Taxation Institute of Australia.  It is fair
comment that INTIAA represents a sector of the market with deep pockets and
contacts in government, as indeed the Minister for the Communications and
the Arts launched INTIAA on the 15th December 1995. The proposed code of
practice makes use of the ABA's favoured PICS web page rating standard
compulsory , creates an Administration Council with a government appointee
as Chair and no direct voting by member service providers on changes to
that Code.

	For those worried about censorship of the Net through the back door, the
proposed Code places on service providers the obligation to block
"X-rated" material as if it were child pornography. A further problem for 
service providers is the requirement that they report "illegal" sites to
the authorities , report "RC" violations to other site administrators and
delete users to enforce compliance with censorship.

	INTIAA's code of practice does not represent a consensus within the
industry.  There are State Internet Associations (WA Internet
Association, South Australian Internet Association,  ACT Internet
Association) which do not subscribe to such a bureaucratic system and
which instead are developing codes of practice which more fully fulfil
industry aspirations and conform more fully to industry experience 
[...and...] make it quite clear that an Internet access provider cannot be
held responsible for content not originating on his or her system under any
circumstances. 
	[...]
	The gloss and complexity of the INTIAA code by comparison has obviously
promoted to the ABA the notion that the industry can self-fund a policing
function as the government may direct."

The INTIAA code is a threat to free speech on the Net (at least in Oz)
equivalent to, and possibly worse than, government censorship.

Regards
Irene

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Irene Graham, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.  PGP key on h/page.
The Net Censorship Dilemma: <http://www.pobox.com/~rene/liberty/>
"A year from now you may wish you had started today."  Karen Lamb.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~