From M/Cyclopedia of New Media
Kathryn's Personal Page
Links
My Proposal and Research Project
- Sub-topics of Online Censorship
E-mail me
To go back to main page click here
To search through google click here
Kathryn Badger 18:49, 3 Aug 2004 (EST)
Annotated Bibliography
Online Censorship - leglislative approaches and major issues
Total words - 1836 (Limited to annotations)
- ABA: Australian Broadcasting Authority (2004) “Complaints,� retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.aba.gov.au/internet/complaints/complaints.htm
Click to view ABA Complaints Website
- This service enables Australian residents, the Commonwealth, the States and Territories as well as corporations to make legitimate complaints about content on websites, newsgroups and bulletin boards. Complaints must relate to content that is or may be prohibited by law. The ABA will instruct the content host to remove the content if the prohibited content is hosted within Australia. If the content is hosed outside Australia the ABA will notify the host of approved filters in accordance with the Internet Industry Association’s code of practice. Illegal material (such as child pornography) would be directed to an appropriate law enforcement agency.
- While the content of the complaints website is not significant, the role the ABA complaints site plays in locating prohibited content is noteworthy. It is for this reason that it warrants a mention in the annotated bibliography.
- Argy, P. (2000) “Internet Content Regulation: An Australian Computer Society Perspective,� University of NSW Law Journal, retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2000/3.html
Click here to view article
- This article is a submission from the Australian Computer Society (“ACS�) who is actively involved in making submissions to State and Federal Governments relating to internet content regulation. While the ACS is philosophically opposed to censorship they have acknowledged the need for young people to be protected from exploitation and explicit material on the internet. The article draws a correlation between the way film and literature is regulated and the way the internet is regulated. Currently the messenger is liable with internet censorship breaches; however, the Australia Post has never been liable for sexually explicit material reaching minors through the mail. The ACS suggests the internet should be censored in the same way as other material so that carriers are not liable for the material they carry when they have no knowledge of its content.
- This is a valid argument from an organisation that provides a oposing argument to the censorship debate. This article is particularly useful for an authoritative body to an common argument.
- Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Act 1999 (Cth)
Click here to download Act
- This Act is a primary source of legislation relating to prohibited internet content in Australia. It is Commonwealth enacted legislation that the Australian Government has introduced to make service providers liable for the content they carry. The underlying principle of the Act is that the carriers of content should have more liability for the content than the creators of the content. It deals with two approaches to content regulation. The first deals with the content hosts and internet content hosted within Australia. The second approach is for internet content hosted outside Australia.
- The act has been criticised as being fundamentally wrong because it makes the carrier liable. Suggestions have been made that the content producers should be the ones liable even though it would offend Australia’s principles of free speech. Despite this, the Act remains the strongest legislative implementation for online censorship.
- Regardless of its downfalls it is an important source for online censorship and for this reason it is mentioned noticeably in other secondary sources referred to in this annotated bibliography.
- Coroneos, P. (2000) “Internet Content Control in Australia: Attempting the Impossible?,� University of NSW Law Journal, retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2000/6.html
Click to view article
- Coroneos is optimistic that censorship legislation will improve over time as governments better understand the medium and are better equipped to adapt to it. This article expresses the common concern with current legislation making the messenger liable (that is the carrier or ISP) rather than the content producer.
- Coroneos identifies a significant problem with current legislation, that is, most illegal material is hosted outside Australia and is consequently outside the jurisdiction of Australian courts. It acknowledges the implementation of filtering devices but criticises their effectiveness as explicit content can be disguised (‘spoofing’) and consequently Australian users can access the material.
- This is a noteworthy article as it acknowledges that legislators will eventually come to terms with the internet revolution but statutory implementation will always have profound limitations in an international medium.
- EFA: Electronic Frontiers Australia (2002, Dec. 20) “Internet Censorship in Australia,� retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens1.html
Click to view article
- The EFA is an organisation that opposes current internet censorship in Australia. The website provides some useful analysis of Commonwealth law that applies to Internet Content Hosts (“ICHs�) and Internet Service Providers (“ISPs�). It also looks at the State and Territory criminal laws that apply to content producers and internet users. State and Territory laws are largely ignored in other resources and this source identifies them specifically.
- In March 2002, the EFA did some extensive research into policies regarding internet censorship in other countries and found that other democratic societies weren’t as regulated as Australia. For this reason it displays a negative tone to Government regulation. The site ventures to suggest that the current legislation isn’t effective. It provides a history of internet regulations in Australia between 1994 and 2000 as well as links to relevant legislation and EFA reports.
- The website is a useful resource for gaining an understanding of the past and present Australian position on online censorship. It also provides an interesting stance to the censorship debate.
- Fitzgerald, B. and Fitzgerald, A. (2002) Cyberlaw: Cases and materials on the Internet, digital Intellectual property and electronic commerce, Australia: LexisNexis Butterworths ISBN 1863162089
- This is a law based book which provides a relatively succinct collection of primary material including cases and legislation as well as secondary sources such as articles and speeches on ‘cyberlaw’, which is law relating to the internet. This resource is the most comprehensive, as it deals specifically with the courts jurisdiction in relation to the internet as well as self-regulatory models of censorship. Chapter 5 is particularly relevant as it is concerned with the regulation of internet content, it distinguishes internet space from real space and suggests that this is one of the significant reasons it is difficult to develop a coherent approach to how the internet should (or should not) be regulated by law.
- Fitzgerald and Fitzgerald introduce lex internet as a term relating to a new jurisdiction, one specifically designated to the internet. Johnson D and Post D in an excerpt from ‘Law And Borders – The Rise of Law in Cyberspace’ (1996), suggest this lex internet jurisdiction would allow new doctrines to be developed that take into account the nature of the internet that the traditional legal doctrines don’t.
- This is a valuable resource in regards to online censorship and raises some important arguments with the relevant authorities to back them up.
- Garnett, R. (2000) “Regulating Foreign-Based Internet Content: A Jurisdictional Perspective,� University of NSW Law Journal, retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2000/8.html
Click to view article
- A jurisdictional based article, it is highly relevant to internet censorship as one of the main limitations, which this article acknowledges, is that national laws have a narrow scope in an environment where content is based outside Australia but accessible by local residents.
- This article establishes that there are two distinct circumstances where this is an issue. Firstly, where an Australian files a suit against a foreign website that infringes upon their rights in the foreign country. Or secondly, where content on a website outside Australia, which is incidentally accessible in Australia, would breach criminal law if published within Australia. The article discusses problems associated with these contradictory situations predominantly the argument over ‘choice of law’, that is, which law should apply.
- The article finishes with some practical suggestions, which should be considered when discussing online censorship. Garnett’s suggestions include a need for a multilateral treaty to harmonise national laws relating to internet content, and a more realistic suggestion of a ‘choice of law rule’ to determine the applicable national law in international internet content disputes.
- Gilchrist, K. (2000) “Millennium Multiplex: Art, the Internet, and Censorship,� University of NSW Law Journal, retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2000/9.html<
Click here to view article
- Gilchrist provides a passionate argument against the Online Services Act and its potential to constrain artistic expression on the internet. The Online Services Act aims to censor material that would be “likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult� (Schedule 5, s2). This clause is designed to prevent children from unsuitable internet content. Gilchrist asserts that this may cause the internet to become an juvenile place where all content would be suitable for children. This is a fiery argument that claims the internet may end up being broad swept with government censorship and bureaucracy.
- Art is often controversial, such is its nature. Technological advances are enabling people to express themselves in a creative manner without the costly outlay. This enables more people to express themselves in a creative way, even though Australia does not have the right to free speech as the Americans do. While this article is not highly authoritative it has some interesting points that demonstrate arguments from the artistic arena and is worth taking into account.
- IIA: Internet Industry Association (2002) “IIA Content Code of Practice,� retrieved August 12, 2004, from http://www.iia.net.au/contentcode.html
Click here to download IIA Content Code
- The Internet Industry Association is our national Internet industry organisation. The IIA provides input to the government to promote regulation of the internet as well as endorsing laws and initiatives to enhance the content quality of internet growth within Australia. Its website provides links to different industry codes including gambling, privacy and cyber crime.
- The relevant code in this instance is the IIA Content Code of Practice version 7.2 which was registered in May 2002 and is currently in force. The Content Code supports user regulation by suggesting effective content filtering controls to users and Internet Service Providers’ (ISP). It has clauses that consider content being hosted within Australia as well as subscriptions from content hosted outside Australia. The Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) is its administrating body.
- This is an important organisation in relation to online censorship and with the assistance of the ABA it is able to limit prohibited material on our local internet.
- Kahin, B. and Nesson, C. (1999) Borders in Cyberspace: Information Policy and the Global Information Infrastructure, Cambridge: The MIT Press ISBN 0-262-61126-0
- While this resource is American and has references to American regulations regarding online censorship it also deals with broad issues in relation to censorship. It is the issues that can be used in relation to Australian censorship research, particularly those dealing with jurisdiction, free speech, unrestricted access versus government regulation, private, national and international overlap in regulation and policy being driven by a continually developing global information infrastructure.
- The book consists of several contributions from authors. Particularly relevant are those contributions from Joel R. Reidenberg who discusses the problems arising with national laws being unable to enforce themselves against breaches arising in other countries. Henry H. Perritt, Jr. talks about laws being able to protect people against piracy and vandalism, he highlights the private dispute resolution systems that are emerging and discusses their effectiveness in relation to the limitations put on the courts because cyberspace is not localised it is international.
- This is a book that contains pieces from academics whose focus is not on the legislation but on the issues behind it. This is a fresh approach and is relevant when considering the deeper issues relating to censorship.
- Kahin, B. and Wilson, E. (1997) National Information Infrastructure Initatives: Vision and Policy Design, Cambridge: The MIT Press ISBN 0-262-11219-1
- This source has several case studies from Asia, North-America, Developing Countries and Europe. It examines national policies in relation to developing information infrastructure particularly through technological advances such as the internet. It is interesting to see national-level policy initiatives in other democratic nations and be able to compare that to the initiatives in Australia.
- Particularly relevant is an article by Walter S. Baer “Will the Global Information Infrastructure Need Transnational (or Any) Governance.� He exemplifies the problems with national governance in a place where transnational technology and stakeholders are involved. The European Union is referred to as a possible solution to make transnational policy in relation to internet regulation. Baer mentions that national and international regulatory initiatives are not keeping pace with technological advancements and as a result the global information infrastructure will largely become self-regulatory or regulated by the private sector.
- This is a source which makes a pragmatic suggestion to the role of the European Union in relation to monitoring international developments of online censorship.
Kathryn Badger 10:09, 13 Aug 2004 (EST)
E-mail me
My Proposal can be found at:
Online_censorship
Kathryn Badger 17:06, 25 Aug 2004 (EST)
