Australian Government Equates Freedom Of Speech To Liking Kiddie Porn

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

1. Stephen Collins
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 8:59 pm

   Conroy, who I expected better of, is going for headlines. It’s obvious. There are many things we *should* be protecting our children from, exploitation being one of them. But this is being couched in frightening terms.

   As we discussed in our OnThePod interview, I’d love the chance to get in his ear and discuss various telecoms and Internet policies with him. The new Labor government has a golden opportunity to make a success of their policies in this area, yet they’ve started off on the wrong foot in a big way.

   The Labor government needs some strong, realistic advice on policy in this area and not just the scare tactics they’re pushing. I don’t know whether their advice is coming from the AFP, ACMA, ACA, vendors, behind-the-times advisors or what, but it’s bad. And the announcements mislead the public.

   If I knew how to get time with Stephen Conroy, or knew someone who could get me that time, I’d be glad to talk with him.

2. Des Walsh
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:03 pm

   Maybe their telecoms advice is coming from Family First, Stephen. They want all the votes they can get in the Senate.

3. Stephen Collins
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:05 pm

   @Des Scary, but possibly true. You can see my thoughts on this at http://www.acidlabs.org/2008/0.....filtering/

4. Not Elder
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:11 pm

   Huh? I’m confused:

   “If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor Government is going to disagree.”

5. Marco
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:14 pm

   These Socialst are just crazy…

   They hate freedom. But they cannot tell it this way …

6. Jon
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:17 pm

   May the government with the highest morals please stand up! This is a pissing contest to see who can oppress their people the most without them being aware of it. In one corner we the the USA, the other China and to round things off, Australia. I am sure other nations around the world do this as well… they just aren’t as vocal about it.

   Jon

7. Fabian Schonholz
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:19 pm

   I am very confused .. how did these guys get elected? Snake … press the button

8. Peter Antypas
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:38 pm

   As much as I hate conspiracy theories, I can’t help but think of the main theme behind Zeitgeist The Movie: Freedom will scale back by popular choice, not oppression. This is social engineering at its best.

9. Whoknows
   

   January 1st, 2008 at 9:58 pm

   I know there are quite a few savvy internet users down under, but I can’t help but wonder if the majority of the population there just doesn’t have a clue about internet technology or the (potential) ramifications of allowing bureaucracies to dictate what is “acceptable content” at a whims notice. Unfortunately, once “central control” over information is established and authority is controlled by a single entity such as a government, it is all too easy to abuse. They may not ever go so far, but eventually the thought may cross someone’s mind to do things such as “kill” sites with dissenting opinions on policy, etc.

   I don’t live in Aus, but my perception based on reading the news is that there seem to be plenty of other things that time/money would be better spent on. Such as mindless random violent crimes in W.A., drug problems, lack of police presence, weak punishment for offenses, better urban planning, etc. It is a truly beautiful country and I hope it stays that way.

10. chrisw
    

    January 1st, 2008 at 9:58 pm

    What narks me is that I didn’t vote for Labor, none of my family or friends did either … in fact I don’t think I know anyone who voted for them …. but they still got elected! I obviously live in a Liberal area.

    It concerns me that the government believes they can censor the web - I think of the millions of tax payer dollars already wasted on NetNanny projects here in Australia and millions Labor intend to blow on it too and it makes me sick. We pay too much tax as it is (I pay almost 50% of my income!) so to see it squandered like this is a slap in the face. I agree that the government should do something to address the problem of child pornography - perhaps educating children about the nasties online and tracking down the perpetrators, locking them up and throwing away the key would be a better approach?

11. EH
    

    January 1st, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    Anybody get a count on the number of strawmen in that quote? My gauge is showing at least three.

12. Geoffrey
    

    January 1st, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    I understand where they are coming from equating free speech with kiddie porn. The viewing of kiddie porn is a thought crime. I remember a couple years ago when one of the top Boy Scouts of America leaders was arrested for having kiddie porn on his computer seeing “Real Time with Bill Maher” that week and him making a comment to that effect, and thinking to myself that it’s really true. The consumption of kiddie porn that’s already been produced probably shouldn’t be a crime, what psychologically damages the kids is the creation of it, which is the rational basis of the law in the first place.

13. Ross Hill
    

    January 1st, 2008 at 10:29 pm

    @Stephen Collins, have you tried contacting him at all?

14. DWM
    

    January 1st, 2008 at 11:42 pm

    Riley, I asked you to take off the tin foil hat; not make a larger one.

15. jessup
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:11 am

    If history is our guide, then this new plan is just a small part of a larger plan to clamp down on ‘internet freedoms’ internally. They can’t say it’s in response to terrorism, so it must be for the protection of the children.

    How often do governments introduce radical new policies at one point, then try to expand them later on?

    This is just the second part of their plan (whatever it is). First it was NetNanny, now this. What is next?

16. jessup
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:18 am

    btw, before I moved from Sydney this year my internet connection (and that of my friends) was exceedingly slow and expensive. Approximately $80 a month for ‘unlimited’ internet. I wasn’t even getting more than 1mbps

    I still couldn’t use BitTorrent, had lots of problems with VOIP, Skype, and some websites. From what I could tell, my experience was quite common.

    This is just one more nail in the coffin. The Australian government is doing this because most Australians don’t seem to care much about the utility of the internet. They’d rather hit the beach, it would seem.

17. Adam
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:35 am

    TechCrunch, thanks for continuing to cover this issue, it’s horrid!

    Labor, you’ve just performed the equivalent of jizzing in my eye on the honeymoon. Not a great start to a relationship.

18. diamondrings411.com
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:08 am

    Uh oh..looks like there will be another Great Wall..only this time in Au

19. Atlanta Wedding Photographers
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:37 am

    Slippery slop indeed. Hyperbole is nice way to make a point but to use it b/c you have no better one then it becomes quite silly. If the Aussie government think the principle is right then i might as well kill myself since i will be dying sometime in the future. What makes the Constitution great is that it does not regulate morality but protects the value of its citizens. This is why the Amendment for prohibition didn’t work in this country.

20. odonja09
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:47 am

    I will make this short and sweet

    I live in australia, and a s far as I know, this thing you are all making a massive thing about is just a free net nanny program that parents can use for children, only free, It is in no way compulsory, and even though our new pm may speak mandarin and be friendly with the chinese, he has been to strip clubs, so he deifnately aint gonna take that away from the internet haha, Politics is a annoying

21. Deborah Robinson
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:57 am

    This is old news. This was actually first reported on the ABC News website two days ago. The SMH was a little slow picking up on the depth of feeling in the community over this issue.

    Furthermore, if you are so sure it will be that easy to bypass the firewall, then why are you making such a fuss? If this does occur, I’m sure you will be among the first to tell the world about it. So Australian parents are in no danger of being lulled into a false sense of security.

    I have received a lot of nasty comments via my blog after I came out in support of a clean feed. So many people have spoken about freedom of speech in this debate and then attempt to silence anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Just like you did when you called Bobbie Johnson a “commie”. Hypocrites!

22. Duncan Riley
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 2:56 am

    Deborah
    you’re an idiot. I’m nominating your site to be blocked (email going to Conroys office now), suck it then when they come for you.

    odonja09
    the last Government called, they want you back. New government, new laws my friend. Follow the links.

23. josh909
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 3:28 am

    jessup: sorry to say but you were obviously with a crap provider. don’t get me wrong, compared to other countries such as japan, korea and the UK, Australia’s broadband plans are truly pathetic but there are better plans than that if you do some research.

    ps. on a side note i can’t believe that australian providers are still allowed to promote ‘unlimited plans’ when they’re capped.

24. Chris
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 6:34 am

    [deleted]

25. gregory
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 8:20 am

    maybe the world has always been so polarized, and we are just more aware of it with modern communications, or maybe the modern technolgy is a sign of something accelerating, and some people are clutching all the more tightly to belief structures that limit change…

    i don’t know….

    but it is something that is becoming obvious globally, independent of culture or education or location…..

    you or i might say it is dangerous, “they” would say we are dangerous…

    curious times

26. gregory
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 8:23 am

    and is that really duncan just above? or has he been hacked?

27. Larry Larrikin
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 8:41 am

    Duncan wrote “worse still it will actually provide a false sense of security to parents who will wrongly believe that the internet is now a safe place for their children”

    That’s like saying seat belts give a false sense of security since you can still die in a car accident. Duncan, how about you stop wearing a seat belt.

28. Roy
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 am

    @22: Duncan is my hero. Unless I’m mistaken, she was trying to say that using free speech to defend free speech is a violation of other people’s free speech. …..wait, what?

    @27: But there are instances where a seatbelt can save you. When exactly can the misconception that your children can’t bypass a filter save you?

29. Hell
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:16 pm

    The internet is never going to be a safe place for anything, ever. By my standards, the internet needs to be “free” not “safe” or “friendly”.

    -Hell.

30. CG
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    Interestingly, the original comment is incorrect. The Australian Government is clearly saying freedom of speech does not encompass kiddie porn.

    It would be interesting to know how many opposed to the filtering attempts are actually parents. It has been my experience that many folks scream to the high heavens about freedom of speech until they are faced with the inundations of modern media and the internet upon their own children. Schools censor daily; usually through fund limitations, but clearly in regard to what books and magazines they purchase or are all of you unlimited free speechers advocating porn for the grade schoolers?

    Frankly, I don’t want kids, my kids, to be able to access every single bit of the web out there. How many of you want that?

31. toss
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm

    Gotta love people that assume every country in the world has some kinda of freedom of speech guaranteed via some form of constitution.
    Not sure if Duncan is from Australia (it’s sounds like he’s an American), but There is no constitional guarantee of freedom of speech here.
    Mr Riley, please dont push your countries agenda on us.
    Thanks we can manage fine on our own.

32. NotSure
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 12:55 pm

    Deborah Robinson

    Are you volunteering as an advocate of this over protection? If our overprotected children turn out with anxiety disorders, you obviously do not mind when we sue you for the treatment, and punitive damages.

    Your overprotection of your children is called child abuse. Maybe someone should move to create legislation banning over protective parenting? Over protective parenting does not equip the children socially, mentally, or emotionally for adult life.

    Here is a life lesson for you. People generally have the common decency not to demand to make you a criminal, but people like you do not have the common decency to resist calling for laws to make anyone who believes differently into a criminal. Your behavior is not moral, it is not even the behavior of a person who has a maturity past 13 years old. Were you an overprotected child? Did you not develop any sense that you were part of a community? You are PART of a community, you are not THE community.

    I fully expect a person like yourself to bring up the child pornography strawman. If people do not agree with you, accuse them by association and then bully them into silence. Since most child molesters choose to take jobs that get them close to children and puts them into a position of trust, maybe we need to ban teachers, priests, police, etc.? There have been recent cases of pedophiles in all of these professions. If censoring the net is so important to the protection of your children, why have you not gone straight to the source of the trouble, and asked for the banning of all these professions? The net is not going to molest your children, but there is a real chance a teacher or police officer may.

33. NotSure
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:14 pm

    CG

    Australian parents speaking. We completely trust our ability to limit our children’s access to things we find offensive. Maybe you do not trust your parenting skills, but we trust our skill. So please stop claiming that everyone in your position has the same viewpoint as you do.

    There are two changes to this stupid proposition of a law that are needed before we would get on board. First is the obvious “Opt In” instead of opt out. The second is the ability to set daily times for the limits to kick in. If we feel the need in the future to have a complete block, then we would like for the block to be set from 7am to 10pm daily. Other people may want different start/end times, so let the parents negotiate with the ISP individual for their own start/stop times. If the net is going to be censored like the TV, then they should at least have viewing times for the children and viewing times for the adults.

    In fact, this seems like the people proposing this law change, are thinking of the interests of TV companies. The net is a direct threat to the profit margins of TV companies. If you crippled the net, people would be likely to switch back to viewing TV in primetime.

34. avinash
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm

    What an equation?? The Australian Government has gone nuts…

35. anonymous
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 1:36 pm

    @21 Deborah,

    Thanks for offering an alternative viewpoint and standing up for your opinion. I also think this issue is not that clear, although most people here are so shocked ‘n awed by terms like “freedom of speech” that they don’t even know what it means.

36. AW
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 2:20 pm

    As an American, I find this incredibly useful: the next time I hear smack talk by some Australian guy lol-ing because he thinks his government / country is better than mine, well…

    I’m just going to point him to “The Internet is Kiddy Porn” Conroy and keep moving.

37. Dave
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    These socialists are a bunch of fascists.

38. Ali
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    i want to take my vote back… Rudd probably is retaliating over his video of him picking his nose….

39. dosomeresearch
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 3:39 pm

    31/toss - Sorry to break it to you but Duncan is an Aussie, so there’s no need to assume your mindless anti-american stance by default.

40. patrick
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm

    The Deborah’s out there want a perfect world where their children can run free completely absent of responsible parenting. This mindset also believes that the government can produce a squeaky clean internet with zero chance of offending the youngest web browser. This will of course result in us supporting their brats when they grow up as helpless victims, or worse, sociopathic neverdowells completely uneducated in the nuances of right and wrong. Not to mention a www where breast cancer discussions are censored for example because they might make mention of the evil boobies.

    Unfortunately, there are plenty of Deborah’s out there, thats just the way it is and thats why the world is the way it is. You folks in AU think you are alone in the long suffering of the Deborah syndrome but you aren’t. We in the US are always racing with you in implementing similarily naive policies doomed to failure. You just happen to be racing ahead just a bit this week.

41. Peter
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    Duncan, while I agree that this is a not a good path for the government to be going down, I can’t help but question your reading comprehension.

    1. “If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor Government is going to disagree” is not an example of the “government equating freedom of speech to liking kiddie porn”

    2. “Labor makes no apologies to those who argue that any regulation of the internet is like going down the Chinese road” does not constitute the government admitting “to taking lessons from China”

    There are enough sensationalist tabloids on the news stands already. I don’t need Techcrunch to become one as well.

42. Anonymous
    

    January 2nd, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    uhh…..

    “If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor Government is going to disagree.”

    No one equates freedom of speech with watching kiddie porn, only the Australian Government does.

    I think you must have misunderstood the quote Duncan. The quote clearly states that if freedom of speech equals watching child porn the government *DISAGREES*

43. Alex Linhares
    

    January 3rd, 2008 at 12:59 am

    You remark that “Whilst no one would disagree with the notion that kidde porn is abhorrent…”

    I am sure mr. Michael Jackson from Sony Music would indeed disagree with such type of prejudice.

44. Aldous Kelly
    

    January 3rd, 2008 at 4:52 am

    “Deborah
    you’re an idiot. I’m nominating your site to be blocked (email going to Conroys office now), suck it then when they come for you.”

    “Blocked” ? “Blocked” ??!?!? That would be uh … the sort of censorship you are condemning no ?

    Duncan, you are a cunt.
    (just exercising my freedom of speech you understand)

45. dickinz
    

    January 3rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    what’s the point of this political posturing ? presumably to hinder pedophilia

    Interpol spends mega bucks trying to catch (and more importantly prosecute) pedophiles - Surely no sane person familiar with the internet and the ability of spammers etc to work around such devices, really think that any net filter is going to do anything that significantly helps that effort.

    Clearly not so we need to look for another motive.

    Perhaps Stephen Conroy is positioning himself to be the publisher of Chairman Rudd’s “little red book”

46. VooDoo
    

    January 3rd, 2008 at 4:23 pm

    what you like or you dont may be similar to freedom of speech. Some may be obscene rape, murder etc and some may be nice cat pictures our mind is crazy no one thinks alike. One of such obscene things is pedophillia, Now anyone who surfs the internet for particular things perhaps he likes them or just interested or curious in the subject. I have searched such materials on the internet and I am surprised the amount of stuff you will find on such subjects whethere its just google or any p2p softwares. The government knows who the Porn Kings are but its the internet everyone is free to surf and view what ever is being uploaded. Its only a matter of finding who these pornKings are who are distributing and encouraging such act and most of the time guess what? its probably the government themselves. Its perfectly okey to have thoughts and acting upon it on the internet but acting upon it in real life is much different.

47. Jake
    

    January 4th, 2008 at 2:13 am

    Contact the Senator here.

    http://www.senatorconroy.com/message.htm

48. No
    

    January 4th, 2008 at 8:47 am

    When American say China do not have human right, we laugh it and say nothing. Now the nonsense turn to us.

49. Daniel
    

    January 4th, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Can only feel glad that I wasn’t a stupid enough to vote for Rudd’s government.

50. PatriotX
    

    January 8th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    this is happening over her in Iceland too, as well in Norway, Sweden and Finland.

    as an activist against this, I and other fellow activists have concluded these firewalls being raised are tools the governments intend also to use possibly on other sexsites and “Gray Areas” such as bittorent sites, an example in Sweden has already confirmed this whereas http://thepiratebay.org/ a famous Swedish bittorentsite had been blocked by the “kiddyporn” firewall there, http://thepiratebay.org/ intends to sue those responsible for false accusations about “kiddyporn”.

    Mind you this is all being done with the consent of the ISP here they are not obligated by law to put up this kind of firewall.. yet!

51. PatriotX
    

    January 8th, 2008 at 5:21 pm

    few links:

    About the Swedish bittorentsite incident
    http://blog.brokep.com/2007/07/13/pat-on-the-head/

    A Video with few ways on how to get past firewalls
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
    Distributing informations like this makes the logic behind the firewall weak.

    and just one example of a site that might not be accessible in future world of firewalls http://www.tamil.net/ coz one mans freedomfighter is another mans terrorist.

52. Nick
    

    January 9th, 2008 at 6:36 am

    AW wrote..

    “As an American, I find this incredibly useful: the next time I hear smack talk by some Australian guy lol-ing because he thinks his government / country is better than mine, well…

    I’m just going to point him to “The Internet is Kiddy Porn” Conroy and keep moving.”

    Riiight. So an idiot Labor Senator (and floundering ‘New Leadership’) makes up for a century of avaricious war-mongering by your social and economic elites, political and military meddling in the affairs of countries who are only linked to yours via “free trade”, a completely shoddy election system and an apathetic public too busy consulting Dr. Phil rather than getting off their butts and voting, a constituency that is content to let a moronic marionet act as their President, a media that purports to merely ‘follow’ the election but effectively decides it before polling day even arrives… not to mention your crap health care system, selective education system (lets pay half a million dollars for college!), a really disturbing identity crisis, environmental degradation not only to your own country but also to the rest of the planet… gah I’m running out of breath here.

    Look. Rudd is a stooge, I didn’t vote for that smarmy pigeon but unfortunately enough people were sucked in to his US-style electioneering campaign and now he’s PM. Furthermore, Australia is far from perfect, we have many many problems. But you need your logic checked out if you believe that this “policy” (if it can so be called) somehow equates to a political or public system as lacking as yours. I’m not anti-American as an absolute, but I think certain things are important in a society, and a country that doesn’t have these things I view as developing or quite simply deficient.

    In any event, this move by Rudd is another blunder, and will possibly alienate even his own voters - which is good, with luck Labor wont last long, Liberal will have learned their lesson, and we can get back to rational government.

53. DKBats
    

    January 10th, 2008 at 5:13 am

    I think this is a stupid discussion. Kiddie porn is against the law in most of the world. Children do not volunteer to participate in it, they are forced to, their rights are violated. Many are abducted children, and all are being abused. So how can anyone make an argument that they have a free speech right to display or acquire films or pictures of this abuse? Free speech is a stupid argument for trying to skirt the law, especially laws that protect children from predators.
    I think its time the free speech cry babies who are doing nothing more than looking for ways to circumvent the law need to grow up. This is a tough choice question over what is more important, the rights of abused children, saftey for those who haven’t experienced the abuse, or the right to something that is twisted to mean whatever criminals need it to mean. freedom of speech is not meant to protect the rights of criminals and leave the victims to fend for themselves.

54. PatriotX
    

    January 11th, 2008 at 2:58 pm

    DKBats

    dont be brainwashed, this firewall has nothing to do with whatever the governments say it has to do with, coz it DOES NOT WORK*, so what remains is that the government wants to put up something they can use to further censor the net in days to come, mark my words.

    *ppl who want to get this shit the governments are talking about will, coz this firewall is useless if you got any technical knowhow. but ppl who dont know how to bypass the firewall will with time get weird anomalys caused by false positives and other technical errors that happend to close access sites the government does not look favorably upon.

    there are examples about ISP’s pulling stunts like this and your can bet your grandma that the government would not be less willing to pulæl these stunts too, example is AOL who hindered access to a site called http://www.dearAOL.com cause of the critic AOL nature of the site, now just go download netnanny and suck on your thumb, cause some firewall will not protect children from being misused, only your eyes from seeing the truth.