Reply to thread

Julia, the more they tinker with it, the more ludicrous it becomes. Conroy is up to his third revision now. It is just becoming silly:

• Mandatory/non-optional  blocking tier (compulsory for both ISPs and Internet users):
  The Government will introduce legislation to require all ISPs to  block RC-rated material hosted on overseas servers (i.e. Refused  Classification  material, a sub-set of so-called "prohibited  content"). A new blacklist of URLs required to be blocked ("the  RC Content List") will be compiled/maintained by ACMA. This  blocking tier will not be optional for adult Internet users.
  
  The vast majority of the sub-categories  of RC material are not  illegal to access/possess under Commonwealth law, nor under the  laws of 6 of the 8 Australian States/Territories.

• Optional blocking tier (optional  for both ISPs and Internet users):
  The Government will encourage ISPs to block additional content as  requested by households, but this will not be mandatory.
  For those families that wish to have a wider range of material  filtered, including possibly X18+ [pornography] and gambling sites, the  Government will establish a grants program  encourage ISPs to offer  these services on a commercial and optional basis.
  
  As at March 2010 the Government has not stated whether the optional tier  will involve blocking of only specific URLs

You know, I'm worried about my kids stumbling on pr0n sites. We had a kid at our primary school who had passed on a note to another kid to go to an easily accessible you tube equivalent pr0n site. But that is our responsibility as parents to prevent this, use filters and educate children as to what is acceptable online behaviour and what is appropriate.

A mandatory filter, is not only objectionable from a liberty viewpoint, but seems to circuit around the idea of what its trying to do without ultimately doing very much at all, save denting our liberties.