IGLHRC Alert: Internet Censorship Measures in Australia



Edited/Distributed by HURINet - The Human Rights Information Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------
## author     : ern-en@mail.iglhrc.org
## date       : 16.12.99
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EMERGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC)


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ACTION ALERT! @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@


Australia's Other Y2K Bug:  Draconian Internet Censorship Measures to
Enter into Effect January 1, 2000

With the expressed intent to provide a "workable and effective regime
to prevent the publication of [offensive or illegal] material" on the
Internet, the Australian Parliament passed the Broadcasting Services
Amendment (Online Services) Bill on June 30, 1999.  Slated to take
effect on January 1, 2000, this legislation imposes codes of practice
for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that require them to block
access to R- or X-rated material hosted overseas, through the
cross-application of standards designed for classifying film and
video. Specifically, X-rated content hosted overseas will be blocked
"at the border" by ISPs, while R- and X-rated content hosted in
Australia will be subject to a takedown order issued to the Internet
Content Host (ICH).

According to the National Classification Code of the Office of Film
and Literature Classification, R-rated material "deals with issues or
contains depictions which require an adult perspective. . . Some
material may be offensive to some sections of the adult community."
The Code also stipulates that X-rated material is not restricted to
pornography, but encompasses anything that would offend a reasonable
adult or that would instruct someone to commit a crime. The
Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) will ensure adherence to
these guidelines; it is mandated to levy fines of up to $27,500 per
day on ISPs hosting material deemed illegal.  It is important to note
that, under this legislation, libraries will be regarded as ISPs--in
short, a public agency may be fined for making material accessible on
its computers that a member of the public might freely borrow from
its shelves.

Moreover, the codes of practice outlined by the Online Services Bill
"must encourage service providers to offer differentiated services to
filter out unacceptable content hosted overseas."  In practice, this
requirement for a "differentiated service" means that Internet
Service Providers (ISP) are likely to install broad software filters
to comply with these codes.  Publication and access on the Internet
will be governed by these filters:  the private firms which produce
them will become the ultimate arbiters of Internet expression in
Australia.

In addition, these provisions of the Online Services Bill will also
apparently govern the transmission and storage of bulk or list-based,
but not personal, e-mail.  A battle over the interpretation of these
provisions will be waged in the courts.

Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) and the Australian Council for
Lesbian and Gay Rights (ACGLR), in coalition with a host of other
LGBT and other community groups in Australia, are gravely concerned
that the Bill effectively mandates a privatized regime of censorship
that relegates authority to ISPs and the producers of crude software
filters--a move that ultimately may entrench discrimination against
lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people.  According to an
ACGLR report submitted to the Senate, which was supported by the New
South Wales Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, Sydney Gay and Lesbian
Mardi Gras, Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, and Gay and
Lesbian Equality (Western Australia):

There are no safeguards against inappropriate blocking or deletion of
Internet content or to protect lesbians and gays from malicious and
spurious complaintsč.ISPs as enterprises that are not in the business
of censorship may also block or delete content arbitrarily and
inappropriately, particularly because of differing interpretations as
to what constitutes 'offensive' material.

This legislation will undoubtedly promote more widespread use of
software filters, which search the content of websites, including the
hidden programming code, for words or phrases that the filter maker
has deemed inappropriate.  This process is often supplemented by the
compilation of lists of banned websites, which can never account for
the ever-burgeoning number of websites on the Internet.  According to
activists in Australia, the likely surge in the use of software
filters, given their crude reliance on banned words and phrases in
scanning website content, could result in massive inappropriate
blockage-in the language of the industry, "collateral damage"
--affecting millions of websites originating in and reflecting the
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered communities.

The US-based Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, in its
ground-breaking report "Access Denied:  the Impact of Internet
Filtering Software on the Lesbian and Gay Community," concluded, "The
majority of software currently on the market, as well as new products
in development, place informational Web sites serving the gay and
lesbian community in the same categories as sexually explicit sites.
The software developers are either unable or unwilling to consider
that information about sexual orientation and identity (e.g., a gay
square dancing site) has nothing to do with sexual behavior, and
everything to do with cultural identity."  In short, these filters
conflate lesbian and gay identities, health, and cultures with sex.

AGCLR underscores the particular impact of this legislation on LGBT
youth.  According to its report to the Senate, " We are already
seeing the impact of software filters in the blocking of access to
health, welfare, and other information for lesbian and gay teenagers
and adults."  As the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation
reminds us, LGBT youth are among those most threatened by the
imposition of filtering software:  "The resources available on the
Internet-websites, chats, and educational resources-are literally
life-saving to these young people, who may live in isolation, not
only geographically but emotionally as well."  The stakes are
illuminated by several well-known studies indicating that lesbian and
gay youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than
their heterosexual counterparts.

The impacts, though, may transcend LGBT communities; many software
filters on the market automatically block access to rape crisis
centers and information about breast cancer, based on screenings of
the words "rape" or "breast"; some popular filters such as NetNanny
prevent subscription to HIV/AIDS or feminist mailing lists.  AGCLR
further maintains that most software filters were developed in and
reflect the unique cultural biases of the United States--and as such,
are not appropriate for deployment in Australia.

This denial of access constitutes a violation of Article 19 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which
states, "Everyone should have the right to freedom of expression;
this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either
orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any
other media of his choice."

The ICCPR enumerates a number of conditions under which the right to
freedom of expression may be restricted, but specifies that.these
restrictions must be lawful--that is, embodied in law and not
arbitrary--as well as necessary to a democratic society.  In allowing
ISPs (and the producers of filters) to impose their own judgment on
the filtering of sites, with the implicit understanding that economic
exigencies will compel that judgment to cast as wide a net of
restrictiveness as possible, the state is abdicating extensive
control over freedom of expression (as well as extensive power over
its protection) to private bodies. In doing so it is not only opening
the door to restrictions that are arbitrary and literally
unlawful--for, despite the motive force behind censorship being an
Act of Parliament, that Act surrenders the powers to standardize and
censor to private corporations.  It also creates restrictions which
are unnecessary to, and indeed fundamentally opposed to, the aims of
a democratic society.  Australia defines itself as not only a
democratic but a "multicultural" state, with a political system
committed to the preservation of diverse cultural identities.  This
legislation invites private agencies to suppress the expression of
those identities, with a new system of social control predicated on a
dictionary-based witch hunt: a frantic hunt for offensive nouns,
indifferent to the semantic richness, social complexities, and living
communities and context those words may represent.  In sum, the
legislation abandons democratic process to the whims, prejudices, and
profit-making needs of corporations.

While this legislation will take effect on January 1, 2000, the
opposition parties in the Senate (Australian Labor Party and
Democrats) have forced a requirement on the parties in government
(Liberal and National) to conduct six- monthly reviews of the effects
of the legislation.  The opposition has indicated that, at some point
in the future, it may call for a repeal.

AGCLR and EFA urgently request letters demanding an immediate repeal
of this legislation.  Letters should be addressed to:

Senator Hon Richard Alston MHR
Minister for Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts
Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2600
Fax (03) 9650 0220
Senator.Alston@aph.gov.au

with copies to


Senator Kate Lundy
Shadow Minister for Information Technology
Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2600
(02) 6230 0413 Fax
Senator.Lundy@aph.gov.au

Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja
Deputy Leader Australian Democrats
Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2600
(08) 8232 7601 Fax
Senator.Stottdespoja@aph.gov.au

and

Senator Bob Brown
Leader Australian Greens
Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2600
(03) 6234 1577  Fax
Senator.Brown@aph.gov.au

Letters should make the following points about the Online Services Bill:

- The crude form of censorship imposed by current filtering software
places informational and social/support Web sites for the gay and
lesbian community in the same categories as sexually explicit sites,
resulting in massive inappropriate blocking.
-  If implemented, these measures could deny access to vital, even
life-saving, representations and information, particularly for
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) youth.
- The rights and expression of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgendered communities are not an acceptable 'trade off' to
satisfy concerns about the protection of minors from viewing material
considered offensive.
- The provisions of the Online Services Bill violate the right to
freedom of expression as enshrined in the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and contravene Australia's international
human rights obligations.
- This legislation imposes a level of censorship on Internet use that
is unprecedented among Western democracies and places Australia out
of line with emerging international norms, which urge the avoidance
of excessive regulation.


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ABOUT IGLHRC @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC), founded
in 1991, is a San Francisco-based non-governmental human rights
organization.  IGLHRC's primary work is to monitor, document and mobilize
responses to human right abuses against lesbians, gay men, bisexuals,
transgendered people, people with HIV and AIDS, and those oppressed due to
their sexual identities or sexual conduct with consenting adults.

IGLHRC
1360 Mission Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA  94103
USA
Telephone: +1-415-255-8680
Fax: +1-415-255-8662
Email: iglhrc@iglhrc.org




----------------------------------
Send mail for the 'huridocs-tech' list to 'huridocs-tech@hrea.org'.
Mail administrative requests to 'majordomo@hrea.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: 'owner-huridocs-tech@hrea.org'.
Archives of previous messages posted to the list can be found at:
http://www.hrea.org/lists/huridocs-tech/markup/maillist.html


[Reply to this message] [Start a new topic] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index] [List Home Page] [HREA Home Page]