Net filter plan is branded draconian

Australia.- (James Massola - The Camberra Times) Plans for a mandatory internet filter to protect Australians from child pornography have been slammed by civil liberties groups as draconian, misleading and a possible invasion of privacy.
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy had originally flagged a test of a filter that would block a list of banned websites. But plans to trial technology that will block file-sharing the primary means for sharing video, pictures and audio over the internet have provoked outrage.
It is understood that a technique known as ''packet inspection'' would be used to monitor and filter file-sharing networks, sparking fears that individual user privacy would be breached.
Senator Conroy has already been attacked for the proposed filter as it is feared the ''clean feed'' would slow down the internet for all Australians, a view supported by an Internet Industry Association report he issued last week.
Hundreds of comments critical of the filtering plan were posted on a blog run by Senator Conroy's department.
In response to the criticism that blocking a list of websites would not work, Senator Conroy revealed in a post on his department's blog that a test of a file-sharing filter could also go ahead.
Civil Liberties Australia director Lance Williamson said a packet inspection could be a possible invasion of privacy.
''What you are really talking about [with file sharing] is akin to Australia Post opening our mail,'' he said. ''Conroy needs to clearly articulate his objectives and he hasn't done that. 'He is talking about targeting child pornography, and the list of sites he talks about are far more extensive than that.''
Mr Williamson said the move could mean ''every piece of communications is going to be scrutinised''.
''The difficulty Civil Liberties has is that they are not talking about the framework, the process ... what we are lacking is an understanding of what is going to happen,'' he said.
Internet Industry Association chief executive Peter Coroneos has also attacked plans to include file-sharing in the trial, saying packet inspection could technically be an invasion of privacy.
''I would expect internet users would want to know how the minister wanted to manage this incursion into people's privacy,'' he said. ''Potentially, users may feel threatened by the imposition of technology that now examines the data stream they are engaged in.''
Mr Coroneos said plans to include file-sharing in the trial ''would only add further anxiety to industry participants''.
Jeremiah Hutchinson, from the Digital Liberty Coalition, said any form of internet filter was an ''Orwellian measure'' that would not effectively combat the sharing of child pornography.
And he predicted the budget for filtering ''blown out of the water'' if file-sharing networks were included beyond the testing stage. ''The funding should be going to the AFP. They are doing an effective job of punishing people who using the internet to consume illegal material,'' he said.
A spokesman for the minister dismissed claims that file-sharing filtering had been a last-minute addition to the Government's plans. And he dismissed privacy fears, saying all ISP customers taking part in the trial would be informed about what was being tested.
Internet service providers Optus and iiNet have applied to take part in the Government's trial of filtering software.
An Optus spokeswoman said the company still did not know exactly when the trial would begin.
IiNet has said it is taking part in the trial to prove that internet filtering does not work.

Preventing child pornography

Japan.- (TMCNews - Japan Times) In late November about 3,500 people from some 170 governments and from international and nongovernmental organizations attended the third World Congress Against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents in Rio de Janeiro. The conference declared that accessing, downloading, storing or viewing child pornography on the Internet is a crime. It urged governments to legally prohibit such acts.

Justice and home affairs ministers of the Group of Eight nations declared in June: "We strongly condemn and denounce all forms of sexual exploitation of children, including the practice of persons traveling abroad and engaging in sexual conduct with children, as well as the alarming flood of images of sexual abuse of children -- so-called child pornography -- on the Internet."
In Japan and Russia, the possession of child porn is not punishable if it is not for sale or offering. The international community accuses Japan of being a major child porn exporter. Around the time of the Rio de Janeiro conference, there was reportedly heavy access from abroad and home after file-swapping software used in Japan allowed child porn to be placed on the Net.
In June the ruling bloc submitted a bill to the Diet that would call for the imprisonment of up to one year or a fine of up to 1 million if a person possesses child pornography to satisfy his or her sexual curiosity. It also calls on Internet providers to cooperate with the police and take steps to prevent the spread of child porn.
The Democratic Party of Japan submitted its own bill, thinking that the ruling bloc's bill could lead to arbitrary investigations. Under the DPJ bill, a person could be imprisoned for up to three years or fined up to 3 million if he or she buys child porn or obtains it repeatedly. Both bills are to revise a 1999 law that protects children under 18 against sexual exploitation.
Although the Rio de Janeiro declaration is not legally binding, it is an international call for Japan to strengthen regulations against child pornography. The ruling bloc and the DPJ should act quickly to find a common ground for effective regulation.