The Inquisitr » censorship

China shuts down World of Warcraft

Chris Greenhough — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:28:50 +0000

Previously, we knew that the Chinese government was censoring World of Warcraft. Now, a separate non-governmental authority has wielded its Banhammer +42 (or whatever) and ordered that the game be shut down throughout the country.

This order comes direct from the General Administration of Press and Publication in China (GAPP), which is apparently displeased that the new version of the game lacks official approval, despite launching September 19. GAPP, incidentally, is going to head-to-head with the Chinese Ministry of Culture, which also looks after online gaming.

Shutting down World of Warcraft down in China essentially blocks 20% of the World’s population from playing the mega-MMO. That’s a big drop in potential consumers for Blizzard, and I suppose Cheetos and Mountain Dew, or whatever the Chinese equivalent is.

Nevertheless, Leon Li, vice president of Chinese mobile Internet firm KongZhong, thinks gamers will cope well enough:

“Millions of Warcraft players will suffer the most. But if you take a long term view of the industry, many of these Warcraft gamers may migrate to other games, so for the other Chinese online game companies, it is a good thing.”

[Reuters, via VG247]

Left 4 Dead 2 appeal rejected in Australia, but awesome new trailer leaked

Chris Greenhough — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:08:05 +0000

The rough most definitely came with smooth today for Left 4 Dead 2 fans.

We’ll start with the bad news first: if you’re Australian, you won’t be playing the Left 4 Dead 2 Valve wanted you to play. The original build of the game was recently refused classification by the OFLC, the body that grants age ratings to all of Australia’s games and films. An appeal was lodged against the decision, but was shot down today.

Fortunately, Valve saw this coming, and has already prepared a version with less gore and more kittens that does fit within OFLC requirements. Hence, that’s the game Australians will be playing.

And now here’s the good news, in the form of the MOST AWESOME VIDEOGAME CINEMATIC EVAR (NSFW, obviously):

Beautiful (though you can kind of see why the notoriously fussy OFLC wasn’t too keen on this).

[Via Kotaku and Joystiq]

Kurt Cobain Guitar Hero 5 videos pulled by Activision

Chris Greenhough — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:37:50 +0000

Remember the fuss kicked up over Kurt Cobain’s appearance in Guitar Hero 5?

The late Nirvana frontman’s avatar could be used to ‘perform’ any song in the popular music game, leading to numerous YouTube videos depicting Cobain singing inappropriate guff, like Bon Jovi. Eventually, Courtney Love caught the scent of money, and threatened to sue Activision (despite signing a contract), while Cobain’s former bandmates publicly tutted from a distance.

Now, publisher Activision is having said YouTube clips taken down, presumably in a desperate, revisionist bid to save face, or maybe just calm the frothing Love down. The heroic chap who uploaded the videos in the first place, one corporalgregg3, has paid the ULTIMATE PRICE. Well, he’s had his YouTube account shut down, anyway:

“Yeah, my last account was permanently disabled due to (I think) Activision. Right before my account was shut down, the Kurt Cobain vid was removed due to copyright claim by Activision Games Inc. I will be continuing with this account so whatever f—k it all.”

Censorship much, Activision?

[Via Kotaku]

Less gory Left 4 Dead 2 cleared for release in Australia

Chris Greenhough — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:03:48 +0000

If ever a screenshot could be called prescient …

A few weeks back, Australian censorship body the OFLC (here represented by the chap smacking Australia in the gob) refused to classify Left 4 Dead 2, banning the game from being sold anywhere in the country. In the OFLC’s view, the zombie shooter “contains violence that is high in impact and is therefore unsuitable for persons aged under 18 to play.”

Publisher EA and developer Valve are still in the process of appealing this decision, but if that falls through (a verdict is due on October 22), Valve has a solution: censor the hell out of its game.

Valve’s Gabe Newell has revealed that a heavily edited version of Left 4 Dead 2 has now been submitted, and has passed the OFLC test gaining an MA15+ rating. Says Newell:

“We think Left 4 Dead 2 is a lot of fun. It’s a game for adults. But we’re aware that different countries have different restrictions, and we want to make the choices that make the game the most fun for that country.”

As it turns out, some big cuts have been made in this sanitized version. News.com.au reports that the OFLC found “the game no longer contains depictions of decapitation, dismemberment, wound detail or piles of dead bodies lying about the environment.”

So Left 4 Dead 2 WILL be coming out in Oz now, though it’s likely to be a nicer, less gory version, with more kittens or something. The original build could still make it out, but we won’t know until a decision is made on EA and Valve’s appeal. It’s plain which version Valve want to see released, and Newell was quite clear about this:

“Our goal is not to ship this second version. The goal, of course, is to get the original version through the Board via the appeal process. If that fails, then the edited version is the back-up plan.”

Obviously, the elephant in the room is the OFLC’s inefficient rating system. Australia desperately needs an R18 classification for games, and until that happens, expect this story to be repeated again and again.

[News.com.au, via VG247]

German school principal: Videogames create “homicidal maniacs”

Chris Greenhough — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:07:27 +0000

Oh, Germany. You know I love you. Your currywurst rocks my world. I giggle at your upside-down houses. Oktoberfest is close to my heart. But please, how about doing something about that loony anti-gaming brigade of yours?

Late last week, a German teenager ran amok at his school with an axe, knives, and molotov cocktails. Mercifully, nobody was injured, but now the school’s principal wants to make sure his students are banned from playing so-called “killergames,” a policy he hopes will eventually extend to a whole network of German schools. Bernd Denning also thinks that games end up playing “a major part in turning minors into homicidal maniacs.” Eh?

I can sort of accept that Denning needs to be seen to be doing something right now, and that this is the kind of traumatic incident that not many of us have direct experience of.

But then games are such an easy target nowadays (particularly in Germany) that it’s hard not to be cynical about these reactions, particularly when sensationalist terms like “homicidal” get thrown about.

Indeed, there seems to be an air of agenda-setting about this case. After all, police have yet to confirm that the teenager responsible was even a gamer, but already Denning doesn’t just want violent games banned within the school – he wants to make sure his pupils are banned from playing them at home. Hopefully, some of the parents are a little more level-headed than poor old Bernd.

[gulli, via Negative Gamer]

Left 4 Dead 2 banned in Australia

Chris Greenhough — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:55:28 +0000

If you live in Australia and desperately wish to play Left 4 Dead 2, prepare for some bad news.*

The OFLC, the notoriously hard-to-please censorship body that classifies all of Australia’s films and videogames, has given Valve’s shooter the banhammer. Officially, the game has been granted a “Refused Classification” rating, meaning it cannot be sold anywhere in Oz. Publisher EA had this to say in response:

“[We] are still working through the submission process with OFLC and want to explore all opportunities before making any comment.”

Sucks to be Australia then, but maybe this is for the good. After all, Aussies can easily import a copy from other PAL regions, and this news could reignite the debate about how badly Australia needs an R18 classification for games. Because seriously, it does.

* If you live in Australia and desperately wish to boycott Left 4 Dead 2, you’ll now have to find something else to whine about pointlessly on the Internet.

[OFLC, via PALGN]

Anonymous vs the Australian Government, play by play live

Duncan Riley — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:00:41 +0000

In two minutes from when I type this, Anonymous is declaring war on the Australian Government over its decision to implement Draconian internet censorship. We’re tracking the attack blow by blow, without taking part.

Tick tick tick.

Update: 7pm: and so it begins.

7:05pm (AEST), Ministers page is slow to load, but still up

7:10pm ACMA still up, but slow. The DoS isn’t working, least on the Australian end.

7:11pm weve confirmed on site (via a source) that the sites due to be attacked have been taken down from the coordination page, possibly before the raid.

7:15pm: Conroy’s pages are all up. The raid looks like it might fail.

7:18pm pm.gov.au DOWN!

7:21pm Kevin Rudd’s page is down completely. Strike one to Anonymous

7:25pm Kevin Rudd is back up.

7:27pm either Anonymous failed, or the Australian Government over prepared. Sadly the raid failed because the target sites remain up.

7:28: that’s it for our live coverage, Anonymous had failed today. They’ll learn though from this, and be more powerful next time.

Venezuela could veto violent videogames

Chris Greenhough — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 04:12:06 +0000

The Chinese and German governments aren’t the only ones to flinch at the mere thought of videogame violence – Venezuela isn’t too keen on the likes of Manhunt 2 (above) either.

A new bill is currently doing the rounds in Venezuela’s parliament that could see all violent videogames banned from sale in the country. The Bill for the Prohibition of Video Games and Toy Weapons – yes, they’re attempting to ban water pistols – has already been approved by the National Assembly in the first of two debates. If it passes debate number two, and is rubber-stamped by the President, M-rated videogames will no longer exist in Venezuela.

From that point on, Venezuelans who are caught selling or distributing such games in the country will be slapped with a colossal fine. Venezuela’s politicians are allegedly concerned with the effect of game violence on kids (yeah, that old chestnut).

True, Venezuela might not have a games market the size of the U.S. or Europe, but it’s the principle, folks. While film and other media remains comparatively unchecked, games are once again getting it in the neck (if you’ll excuse the violent analogy).

[Via Kotaku]

Poison pen wielder of Skanks in NYC revealed as… Rosemary Port?

Kim LaCapria — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:27:18 +0000

Rosemary Port, 29, is the party-girl behind the curtain of now-defunct, legally plagued blog Skanks in NYC.

Port, an unemployed nightclub promoter, is none too pleased with the forcible unmasking and is said to be exploring legal action against Google. (Poor Google, they can’t seem to please anyone in this whole kerfuffle.) Port has retained the services of a lawyer, who spoke to the NY Post about his client’s reaction to the surprising verdict:

Port countered yesterday by hiring hotshot Manhattan lawyer Sal Strazzullo, who said his client doesn’t regret the blog — “she regrets the court’s decision” that her identity should be revealed.

“I’m shocked that my right to privacy has been tampered with,” Port said in a statement.

Strazzullo said Port is “very scared” her name is now public, and “confused” about how a judge could let that happen. “This doesn’t happen to people every day.”

The post couldn’t wrangle a comment out of Port, although her boyfriend charmingly told a reporter “you wish you had my life” as the couple hopped into a car on the Lower East Side. The boyfriend, Daniel Dimin, is apparently the inspiration for the whole Skanks in NYC debacle. Port is said to have begun the blog after target Liskula Cohen trash-talked Port to Dimin.

Cohen also had another round of attention from the Post- she was interviewed after opting to drop the $3m defamation suit against Port. And in the article, she seems to be just as nutty as her litigious ways might suggest. When the reporter appears to be noting Cohen’s smoking habit, Cohen flies off the handle:

“My grandmother wouldn’t like it,” she said cutely. I wrote it down. A throwaway line.

Oh. My. God.

In an instant, lovely Liskula turned on me in a sputtering, cursing fury. It was not pretty.

“What are you doing?” she snarled. “Leave my family out of this!

“What do you think — I’m a f- – -ing asshole?” she said, staring straight into my eyes while unleashing a torrent of curses that nearly made me lose my pen.

“That isn’t nice, is it? IS IT?!!” she demanded.

Waah: Liskula Cohen goes after blogging because someone called her a skank

Kim LaCapria — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:24:49 +0000

And she’s not gonna take that lying down.

Liskula Cohen, a NYC party girl who dabbled in modeling before her face was disfigured in a 2007 attack with a broken bottle, won a ruling to reveal the identity of the writer of a blog calling Cohen a skank. Yes. She went to court and sued Google because someone called her a skank. But as the above picture illustrates, isn’t truth and absolute defense against libel?

The blog has since been pulled down, but Gawker gacked the text that sent Cohen sobbing to the courts about her reputation and the mean mean words on teh internets:

I would have to say that the first place award for “Skankiest in NYC” would have to go to Liskula Gentile Cohen. How old is this skank? 40 something? She’s a psychotic, lying, whoring, still going to clubs at her age, skank.

Yeah she may have been hot 10 years ago, but is it really attractive to watch this old hag straddle dudes in a nightclub or lounge? Desperation seeps from her soul, if she even has one.

Enjoy the pic.

Bloggers have long endured attacks on free speech and attempts by those who wish to silence them, but this is the first ruling of its sort. From PC World:

…The Delaware Supreme Court overturned a decision to reveal a blogger’s identity, after the person accused a local politician of having “an obvious mental deterioration.” A second posting said the politician “is as paranoid as everyone in the town thinks he is.”

The court favored the blogger, fearing that unmasking him or her would have a chilling effect on anonymous speech. Furthermore, the court said that blogs often provide an open forum for the offended party to respond directly to the original posts.

More recently, a Maryland court protected anonymous posters on a newspaper’s Internet forum, after a local Dunkin’ Donuts store manager claimed they were defaming him by calling the restaurant dirty. The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed an earlier decision to reveal the posters’ identity, but laid out a five-step process for judges to follow in future defamation cases, including alerting anonymous posters of a subpoena by a message on the site in question, and offering a clear statement of how the inflammatory comments caused damage.

Thanks to Cohen’s sad inability to tolerate unkind assessments, bloggers have a whole new set of legal concerns. While libel and slander are one thing, this blogger was taken to court for her opinion. That’s a frightening thing, even scarier because a judge sided with Cohen on the matter. The blogger’s attorney insists it’s a First Amendment issue:

“These words are not actionable,” Salisbury said. “They were not nice, they were insulting, offensive to some. That does not mean that the law provides redress for these insults. So the defense is really, this is free speech.”

So, what do you think? Is calling someone a skank protected free speech, or defamation?

Chinese government censors World of Warcraft

Chris Greenhough — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:03:06 +0000

Chinese internet company Netease recently took over the hosting of World of Warcraft in China, resulting in the game being down for six weeks. The reason? Chinese government censors have been wielding the scissors with Blizzard’s MMO phenomenon, before allowing it to restart.

The result is a less gory WoW that’s deemed to be more suitable by the Chinese regulators. No, I never regarded World of Warcraft as being gory either, but it’s worth remembering that age ratings for games don’t exist in China.

Some of the changes made by the famously cuddly Chinese government include piles of bones in the game being replaced with sandbags, undead in-game avatars having a layer of flesh attached to visible skeletal bones, and icons depicting skulls, severed heads, and blood changed to more generic-looking boxes. You can see some ‘before’ and ‘after’ shots for yourself here.

Even the color of blood that spills from monsters has changed from red to black. This has led to community jokes about their characters running on petroleum. As one Chinese gamer says:

“It’s just like oil, my orc warrior have black blood and hit with dark effect, sucks! Petroleum, the Valuable Resources of Human, we shouldn’t waste it.”

You … probably had to be there.

[MMOSite, via Gamasutra]

Keep it up says Crytek to Germany and we’ll leave

Steven Hodson — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 00:09:27 +0000

For those that might not recognize the name Crytek is a German video game software developer best known for their Crysis game as well the CryEngine a well respected gaming engine. Anyway it seems that Germany is threatening to ban all action games in the country and as a result the companies would no longer be able to develop them either.

Well this isn’t sitting to well with Cevat Yerli the president and co-founder of Crytek who has said publicly that if Germany goes ahead with this ban he will move the company out of Germany.

"A ban on action games in Germany is concerning us because it is essentially like banning the German artists that create them," he told PC Games Germany. "If the German creative community can’t effectively participate in one of the most important cultural mediums of our future, we will be forced to relocate to other countries.

"The current political discussion will deprive German talent of its place on the global game development stage, and deprive German consumers of entertainment that is considered safe and fun around the world."

Source: GamesIndustry.biz :: Yerli: Crytek will leave Germany if country bans action games

Other than the fact that Yerli wouldn’t have any other choice but to move the company if he wanted to keep on creating games like Crysis it is nice to see standing up and saying how stupid this idea is in the first place

What the hell is wrong with Apple?

Steven Hodson — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:46:56 +0000

I don’t get it all you Apple fans, really I don’t. Sure I can understand your faithfulness to the company vision because they give you some great hardware and ya, okay, some good software but at the same time they are proving time and time again that you play the way they want you to or else. It is just like the ongoing mess with the AppStore and the totally screwed up way that their approval system works – or doesn’t work.

If the whole AT&T and Google Voice mess wasn’t bad enough we find out that it takes 900 plus totally questionable apps before the author and his company has their apps pulled along with his Apple developer license. Now add to this the fact that whoever is manning the AppStore has decided that it’s okay to censor a dictionary and rate it at 17+

The story as being reported by John Gruber over at Daring Fireball tells of a company called Matchstick Software and their recently released Ninjawords dictionary. The description of the app goes like this

Ninjas are three things:

They’re smart

They’re quick

They’re deadly accurate

Ninjawords is a dictionary for the iPhone built on these principles. We made it because we saw that the low-cost dictionaries on the App Store are slow, cluttered, and all use the same bad data source (WordNet) for their definitions.

Ninjawords takes a different approach. We use awesome, fresh, high quality data with more words and synonyms than you can throw a ninja star at. And best of all, when you look up your words, they all stay on the page. No need to flip back and forth between different pages as you look up multiple words.

Source: John Gruber – Daring Fireball

The only problem is that throughout the arduous approval process Apple has been consistently censoring words out of the – dictionary. WTF! .. censoring a dictionary?

So it would seem as Phil Crosby explained to John Gruber

The App Store approval process for Ninjawords took two months. Matchstick submitted the first build on May 13; it was rejected two days later. Says Crosby, “Our app was crashing on the latest beta of iPhone OS 3.0. We quickly fixed this issue and resubmitted.”

Matchstick did not hear back from Apple until May 30. Then, says Crosby: “We were rejected for objectionable content. They provided screenshots of the words ‘shit’ and ‘fuck’ showing up in our dictionary’s search results. What’s interesting is that we spent a good deal of time making it so that you must type vulgar words in their entirety, and only then will we show you suggestions in the search results. For instance, if you type ‘fuc’, you will not see ‘fuck’ as a suggestion. This is in contrast to all other dictionaries we’re aware of on the App Store (including Dictionary.com’s application), which will show you ‘fuck’ in the search results for ‘fuc’, ‘motherfucker’ for ‘mother’, etc.

In other words, the App Store reviewer(s) explicitly searched for curse words they already knew, and found them.

Source: John Gruber – Daring Fireball

Why are Apple users even putting up with this kind of shit? Seriously folks for all you might like to smack Microsoft around if they did anything like this all hell would break loose – literally. You would hear the wails and cries of outrage echoing throughout the blogosphere and beyond. You’d see calls for the DoJ to step in and ask for explanations.

And yet Apple does this and the users sit passively by as hard working developers try to bring you the best apps they can for your hunk of electronics. Why are you willing to stand for this kind of crap? Is the cool factor of being a Mac or iPod or iPhone user so important that you are willing to let a company trample all over stuff this way?

Does paying the Apple tax also take away your balls to stand up to the company and tell them that this kind of thing just isn’t acceptable.

Sorry but this kind of thing just pisses me off and it galls me that people are so willing to let it all go by the wayside for some status piece of plastic.

Censorship comes to America: AT&T blocks 4chan /b/

Duncan Riley — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 00:54:15 +0000

The global internet censorship debate landed in the home of the free Sunday with news that AT&T has censored the popular 4chan /b/ image board.

The censorship was first reported on Reddit, where users confirmed with AT&T that the site had indeed been censored, and was not being blocked due to a technical issue. 4chan owner Moot later confirmed the news, saying that the /r9k/ was also blocked and that AT&T users should “call or write [to] customer support and [AT&T] corporate immediately.”

The censorship at this time extended only to AT&T DSL customers, with wireless (3G) customers believed to be unaffected. Erling Løken Andersen notes that 15.5% of all US internet users use AT&T DSL, meaning that /b/ is now blocked somewhere around 40-60 million people in the United States.

There is no official word from AT&T on the decision yet, and given that it’s Sunday still in the US none is likely until business hours Monday. 4chan users though aren’t particularly happy about the decision, with /b/tards currently discussing ways to fight back against the imposition of censorship.

The decision by AT&T to censor /b/ may also further spark further debate around net neutrality; love or hate 4chan, the decision by a provider to start censoring sites is the beginning of a slippery slope to unaccountable corporate imposed draconian censorship that should have no place in allegedly free democratic societies.

There is also the question of why censor /b/ now and not previously? Could a third party such as Scientology have lobbied for the decision?

Australian Government may introduce three strikes piracy law

Duncan Riley — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:41:21 +0000

The Australian Government is considering the implementation of a three strikes piracy law as part of a policy that aims to “develop sustainable online content models.”

In a wide ranging “Digital Economy Future Directions” paper that completely ignores early stage web startups, the Australian Government said of piracy that it “recognizes a public policy interest in the resolution of this issue” and that it is currently “working with representatives of both copyright owners and the Internet industry in an effort to reach an industry-led consensus on an effective solution to this issue.”

The paper specifically details a three strikes piracy proposal, although does note that some submissions “opposed this proposal for reasons including the lack of judicial oversight of administering sanctions based on private allegations, the lack of public transparency about the process and concern over consumer rights.”

What is notable is the wording: the Government is currently “working with representatives;” if there was to be no change to current laws (which don’t include three strikes provisions) then there would be nothing to work on. The implementation of three strikes in Australia would have to be enforced by law as notable large ISP’s are already on record saying that they don’t support it, and Australia’s second largest ISP iiNet is currently being sued by the movie industry for allowing customers to download pirated content.

The paper also mentions the importance the Government places on censoring the internet, or as they like to call it, offering “cyber safety” so that the “community enjoys digital confidence” (no, I’m not making this up.) That they’d introduce a three strikes law along with Chinese style censorship really shouldn’t be all that surprising.

Ukraine bans porn…except for medical purposes

Duncan Riley — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:09:10 +0000

The Ukraine Government has banned pornography…except where the porn is prescribed for medical purposes.

Under the law, possession of any pornography (not just hardcore porn) is a criminal offense attracting a fine of roughly $110, or up to 3 years in prison. The production of porn was already illegal in the country.

According to The Register, the problem with the law (like most censorship efforts) comes down to defining what counts as porn. The definition (as translated) reads “”Pornography is vulgar, candid, cynical, obscene depiction of sexual acts, pursuing no other goal, the explicit demonstration of genitals, unethical elements of the sexual act, sexual perversions, realistic sketches that do not meet moral criteria and offend honor and dignity of the human by inciting low instincts.”

Confirmed: Second Life, online adult games to be banned outright in Australia

Duncan Riley — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:44:19 +0000

The Australian Minister for Censorship has today confirmed what I’ve been reporting for nearly two years: online adult games including Second Life will be banned in Australia.

A spokesman for Censorship Minister Stephen “Goebbels” Conroy confirmed to Fairfax newspapers that “under the filtering plan, it will be extended to downloadable games, flash-based web games and sites which sell physical copies of games that do not meet the MA15+ standard.” In Australia, the MA15+ rating means that the content is restricted to those aged 15 and above. Australia does not have a R 18+ or similar rating for computer games, with all adult games automatically being classified as RC (Refused Classification.)

I wish I hadn’t been right here, so I take no delight in being so. However I was derided by more than a few bible bashing ALP voting Conroy lovers (in a platonic sense of course, cock sucking will be banned under the censorship regime) as being extreme and wrong in the past, so here’s two examples of things I’ve written previously about what Conroy was planning to do:

December 2007
To be censored by the Australian Government is “pornography and inappropriate material.” X rated pornography is illegal online in Australia, as are casino style internet gambling, certain forms of “hate” speech and R rated computer games.

January 2009
We know that among other “unwanted” things, the following falls into the censorship regime: porn, R rated games, certain types of political speech (for example discussion of methods of euthanasia) and possibly copyrighted content.

I am though surprised this is news today, as the policy was ALWAYS THERE in the fine print from day one. Conroy has waffled and avoided ever giving a direct answer about until now, but he’s also very good at that.

That at the half way point of 2009 this is even still on the agenda in Australia is a fucking disgrace, and the more the Government confirms the details, the more totalitarian the proposal becomes, and even China starts to look more open and free.

Chinese filtering move demonstrates futility of Australian censorship proposal

Duncan Riley — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 01:30:56 +0000

The Chinese Government has issued a decree that all computers sold in the country must include filtering software from July 1. The software will allow the Chinese Government to filter sites it deems inappropriate on each PC, including the ability to regularly update computers with up-to-date filtering lists.

The need to introduce PC based filtering in China can only be interpreted one way: existing ISP level filtering in China is not adequately working, despite years of investment in technology and support staff.

So if China can’t get ISP level filtering to work, why does the Australian Government believe that it’s different?

Australia’s proposed “Great Firewall of Australia” internet censorship regime proposes to block thousands, even possibly millions of sites (the Minister today still refuses to give a straight answer) using ISP level filtering. Unlike China, where the methods to bypass filters would be subject to strict censorship, the knowledge and tools needed to bypass the Australian version are freely available, and as far as we know, are not about to be banned either. Tools is probably the wrong way of putting it, because tools imply some level of effort, where as bypassing ISP level filtering isn’t anywhere nearly that hard.

Proof that filtering doesn’t work effectively in China is yet another reason why the Australian Government must drop its draconian internet censorship policy. Who knows: Australia’s Mandarin speaking Prime Minister may actually recognize that if his mates in China can’t get it right….

Australian Government may backflip on compulsory internet censorship

Duncan Riley — Tue, 26 May 2009 10:01:09 +0000

The Australian Government for the first time since their election may be considering optional internet censorship, the original policy they were elected on.

Australian Minister for Censorship Stephen Conroy today (Tuesday local time) told a Senate estimates committee that the “Great Firewall of Australia” could be implemented by a voluntary industry code, as opposed to legislation.

The implication from Conroy is that the same outcome can be done via an industry code, but more likely that the Australian Government doesn’t have the numbers in the Senate to pass the enabling Legislation. The current Australian Government does not hold a majority in the Senate (the upper house), and relies on the votes of the Green Party, and a number of independent senators. So far, the Greens, and the Independent Senators have expressed serious reservations on the proposed fascist state censorship proposal.

Senator Conroy told the Senate Committee: “Mandatory ISP filtering would conceivably involve legislation … voluntary is available currently to ISPs…One option is potentially legislation. One other option is that it could be (on a) voluntary basis that they (ISPs) could voluntarily agree to introduce it.”

There is no concrete evidence that the Australian Government is backing down from its China inspired censorship regime outside of Conroy’s words.. The current ISP trial continues.

Real hope for the next generation

Steven Hodson — Sun, 24 May 2009 16:03:12 +0000

One might think in this day and age of instant gratification, texting non-stop, and sound bite attention spans that appreciation for literature, classic and modern, has fallen by the wayside. Well thanks to Cory Doctorow over at Boing Boing I thankfully found one young person who was will to chance punishment in order to share some of the best books written, but were banned by the school, with fellow students. I’m not even going to try and paraphrase the story which starts as a question at Yahoo Answers

Is it OK to run an illegal library from my locker at school?

Let me explain.
I go to a private school that is rather strict. Recently, the principal and school teacher council released a (very long) list of books we’re not allowed to read. I was absolutely appalled, because a large number of the books were classics and others that are my favorites. One of my personal favorites, The Catcher in the Rye, was on the list, so I decided to bring it to school to see if I would really get in trouble. Well… I did but not too much. Then (surprise!) a boy in my English class asked if he could borrow the book, because he heard it was very good AND it was banned! This happened a lot and my locker got to overflowing with the banned books, so I decided to put the unoccupied locker next to me to a good use. I now have 62 books in that locker, about half of what was on the list. I took care only to bring the books with literary quality. Some of these books are:

>The Perks of Being a Wallflower
>His Dark Materials trilogy
>Sabriel
>The Canterbury Tales
>Candide
>The Divine Comedy
>Paradise Lost
>The Godfather
>Mort
>Interview with the Vampire
>The Hunger Games
>The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
>A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court
>Animal Farm
>The Witches
>Shade’s Children
>The Evolution of Man
> the Holy Qu’ran
… and lots more.

Anyway, I now operate a little mini-library that no one has access to but myself. Practically a real library, because I keep an inventory log and give people due dates and everything. I would be in so much trouble if I got caught, but I think it’s the right thing to do because before I started, almost no kid at school but myself took an active interest in reading! Now not only are all the kids reading the banned books, but go out of their way to read anything they can get their hands on. So I’m doing a good thing, right? Oh, and since you’re probably wondering "Why can’t you just go to a local library and check out the books?" most of the kids are too chicken or their parents won’t let them but the books. I think that people should have open minds. Most of the books were banned because they contained information that opposed Catholisism. I limit my ‘library’ to only the sophmores, juniors and seniors just in case so you can’t say I’m exposing young people to materiel they’re not mature enough for. But is what I’m doing wrong because parents and teachers don’t know about it and might not like it, or is it a good thing because I am starting appreciation of the classics and truly good novels (Not just fad novels like Twilight) in my generation?

- Kat Atreides

All I can say is – faith restored.