Business

<< Previous   of   Next >> Associated Press  (click to enlarge) People walk past an Internet cafe in Sydney, Australia. Many Australians are outraged at the government's plan to build what they are calling the Great Aussie Firewall. A mandatory Internet filter would block at least 1,300 Web sites prohibited by the government.   ADVERTISEMENT   CONTACT THE HERALD Mike Benbow, Business Editor benbow@heraldnet.com   Published: Sunday, December 28, 2008 Proposed "Great Aussie Firewall" draws fire Down Under At least 1,300 Web sites prohibited by the government would be blocked by new filter. Associated Press SYDNEY, Australia -- A proposed Internet filter dubbed the "Great Aussie Firewall" is promising to make Australia one of the strictest Internet regulators among democratic countries. Consumers, civil-rights activists, engineers, Internet providers and politicians from opposition parties are among the critics of a mandatory Internet filter that would block at least 1,300 Web sites prohibited by the government -- mostly child pornography, excessive violence, instructions in crime or drug use and advocacy of terrorism. Hundreds protested in state capitals earlier this month. "This is obviously censorship," said Justin Pearson Smith, 29, organizer of protests in Melbourne and an officer of one of a dozen Facebook groups against the filter. The list of prohibited sites, which the government isn't making public, is arbitrary and not subject to legal scrutiny, Smith said, leaving it to the government or lawmakers to pursue their own online agendas. "I think the money would be better spent in investing in law enforcement and targeting producers of child porn," he said. Internet providers say a filter could slow browsing speeds, and many question whether it would achieve its intended goals. Illegal material such as child pornography is often traded on peer-to-peer networks or chats, which would not be covered by the filter. "People don't openly post child porn, the same way you can't walk into a store in Sydney and buy a machine gun," said Geordie Guy, spokesman for Electronic Frontiers Australia, an Internet advocacy organization. "A filter of this nature only blocks material on public Web sites. But illicit material ... is traded on the black market, through secret channels." Communications Minister Stephen Conroy proposed the filter earlier this year, following up on a promise of the year-old Labor Party government to make the Internet cleaner and safer. "This is not an argument about free speech," he said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "We have laws about the sort of material that is acceptable across all mediums and the Internet is no different. Currently, some material is banned and we are simply seeking to use technology to ensure those bans are working." Jim Wallace, managing director of the Australian Christian Lobby, welcomed the proposed filter as "an important safeguard for families worried about their children inadvertently coming across this material on the Net." Conroy's office said a peer-to-peer filter could be considered. Most of today's filters are unable to do that, though companies are developing the technology. The plan, which would have to be approved by Parliament, has two tiers. A mandatory filter would block sites on an existing blacklist determined by the Australian Communications Media Authority. An optional filter would block adult content. The latter could use keywords to determine which sites to block, a technology that critics say is problematic. "Filtering technology is not capable of realizing that when we say breasts we're talking about breast cancer, or when we type in sex we may be looking for sexual education," Guy said. "The filter will accidentally block things it's not meant to block." A laboratory test of six filters for the Australian Communications Media Authority found they missed 3 percent to 12 percent of material they should have barred and wrongly blocked access to 1 percent to 8 percent of Web sites. The most accurate filters slowed browsing speeds up to 86 percent. The government has invited Internet providers to participate in a live test expected to be completed by the end of June. The country's largest Internet provider, Telstra BigPond, has declined, but others will take part. Provider iiNet signed on to prove the filter won't work. Managing director Michael Malone said he would collect data to show the government "how stupid it is." READER COMMENTS Be the first to comment. You must be a registered user and verify your e-mail address to post comments to blogs or articles on HeraldNet. To register, click here. To read other terms and conditions, click here. Log out

1. Fireworks blamed in house fires; three people injured 2. Mill Creek lawyer pursuing lawsuit for island nation 3. Everett may have to lobby for Lincoln's replacement 4. Mortgage relief slow in coming for strapped homeowners 5. Fireworks blamed in Marysville house fire 6. Fourth proves a day for colors 7. Landlords should read up before they rent out 8. Marysville postpones remodel of high school 9. Officials in fever to keep Boeing 10. Credit card companies cut debtors some slack 2 - Top 10 Stories Most Talked about 3 - Top 10 Stories Most Emailed

• Warriors looking for balance • Three Scots vying for QB slot • Jackson looks for another title • Decorated veteran continues to serve as active volunteer • City Council reviewing sign regulations • Wildcats get a peek at newcomers • Lynnwood still in rebuilding mode • Shoreline feels a kindergarten growth spurt • Leave the patriotic pyrotechnics to professionals, cities urge • Trading dollars for kilowatts New PUD energy conservation programs save ... • By John Wolcott SCBJ Editor • Record crowd at Paine Field’s General Aviation Day as FHC Celebrate ... • Celebration of aviation's history and future presented in multiple venue ... • The time is ripe for small businesses to take no prisoners • EPA proposal to regulate global-warming gases would be costly for small ... • Innovation helps the town of Forks to offset tough economy • Powering the people