Slashdot Mirror

I'm an Aussie, too.

Senator Alston may not be the greatest **computer** intellectual, but let's be fair. Who writes this stuff? He does not invent policy or Bill text himself.

Someone in these places is doing it:
- Department of Communications, IT and the Arts http://www.dcita.gov.au (e.g. Networking the Nation http://www.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_1-2_3-3_461-4 _106337,00.html)
- National Office for the Information Economy http://www.noie.gov.au/
- Treasury's e-commerce office http://www.ecommerce.treasury.gov.au/
- somewhere else in the Australian Federal Government http://www.fed.gov.au

Yet, the semi-Westminster form of Government we operate under in Australia both appluads and blames the Minister responsible. Sen. Richard Alston

Australian Government to ban spam

The Australian Government will move to ban electronic junk mail (spam) and enforce this ban through the Australian Communications Authority (ACA) in legislation that will be introduced to Parliament later this year, the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Richard Alston, announced today.

Senator Alston said that Cabinet had yesterday agreed to anti-spam legislation including fines, along with a raft of other measures aimed at reducing the influx of spam into Australian e-mail inboxes.

Spam is a menace to home and business e-mail users and is a major scourge of productivity. Spam e-mails are the mosquitoes of the Internet - numerous, annoying and often carrying nasty viruses.

Australia will soon be applying a large dose of 'spam repellent' and sending a strong message to spammers that indiscriminate and unsolicited bulk e-mailing will not be tolerated. The adoption of an opt-in regime will make Australia world's-best practice on spam and put Australia in a strong position to participate in international efforts.

The Australian Government is committed to taking a strong stand against spam and has moved quickly to respond to the report by the National Office for the Information Economy The spam problem and how it can be countered released in April this year. This report provided a blueprint to take action against the problem to provide the maximum possible protection against spam.

While the report made it clear that there is no silver bullet against spam, there are many roles that all parties can play in a multi-layered approach. The anti-spam measures that the Australian Government will introduce include:

* National legislation, to be enforced by the ACA, banning the sending of commercial electronic messaging without the prior consent of end-users unless there is an existing customer-business relationship (an opt-in regime);

* Civil sanctions for unlawful conduct including financial penalties, an infringement notice scheme and the ability to seek enforceable undertakings and injunctions;

* The requirement for all commercial electronic messaging to contain accurate details of the sender's name and physical addresses and a functional 'unsubscribe' facility to enable people to opt-out;

* Banning the distribution and use of e-mail 'harvesting' or list-generating software, and

* Working together with international organisations to develop global guidelines and cooperative mechanisms to combat the global spam problem.

The Government will work closely with industry to ensure that Australia has a workable regime without harming legitimate business practices. The regime will seek to protect businesses which undertake legitimate e-mail direct marketing in line with the requirements of the Privacy Act. There will be a 120-day sunrise period without penalties from the enactment of the legislation for businesses to ensure their marketing practices are in line with the legislation.

Stakeholders including the Internet Industry Association (IIA), the Australian Direct Marketing Association (ADMA), small business associations and other not-for-profit organisations will be consulted on the details of the legislation.

The Government will also work with industry to develop relevant codes of practice to be registered with the ACA, building on initiatives such as the IIA's 'No Spam' campaign, which since April has enabled consumers to access anti-spamming technology for a free month's trial.

The measures announced today establish a framework for Australia to begin the important task of eradicating spam. The package will be accompanied by an education campaign to raise awareness of the nature of spam and anti-spam measures and to inform individuals and business of their rights and responsibilities when it comes to spam.

Leg

According to the NOIE media release, they aim to ban 'the distribution and use of e-mail 'harvesting' or list-generating software'. I read this as any software which trawls web sites etc. for addresses. While this in itself will make little difference to the educated few, it should curtail their ability to sell 'harvesting' as a service, and is thus a GoodThing[tm].

According to the NOIE media release, they aim to ban 'the distribution and use of e-mail 'harvesting' or list-generating software'. I read this as any software which trawls web sites etc. for addresses. While this in itself will make little difference to the educated few, it should curtail their ability to sell 'harvesting' as a service, and is thus a GoodThing[tm].

IT policy in Australia is a national disgrace and will continue to be as long as Richard Alston is in charge. He has been dubbed Senator "Luddite" by The Register. Gross stupidity withstanding, everything he does is clearly to benefit one person: Richard Alston. I know someone who stood next to him in a photo shoot recently and she said Senator Alston spent about 30 minutes getting makeup done before the picture was taken. She also said his perfume (sorry cologne) stinks.
His website reflects his self-aggrandizing nature. Notice how Senator Luddite's name is plastered all over the website taking credit for his staffers work like this report on spam
His latest disaster was revealed in parliament recently when it was revealed that he spent $4 million dollars on his departments website. When the scandal broke, the press went around and received quotes from web shops for roughly $65000 for the exact same job. Have a look yourself. There are multiple javascript errors on the home page apparently. I'm not suprised. I've corresponded with this department and many of the staffers have problems receiving/sending email. It's a joke that this office should be setting IT policy in Australia

IT policy in Australia is a national disgrace and will continue to be as long as Richard Alston is in charge. He has been dubbed Senator "Luddite" by The Register. Gross stupidity withstanding, everything he does is clearly to benefit one person: Richard Alston. I know someone who stood next to him in a photo shoot recently and she said Senator Alston spent about 30 minutes getting makeup done before the picture was taken. She also said his perfume (sorry cologne) stinks.
His website reflects his self-aggrandizing nature. Notice how Senator Luddite's name is plastered all over the website taking credit for his staffers work like this report on spam
His latest disaster was revealed in parliament recently when it was revealed that he spent $4 million dollars on his departments website. When the scandal broke, the press went around and received quotes from web shops for roughly $65000 for the exact same job. Have a look yourself. There are multiple javascript errors on the home page apparently. I'm not suprised. I've corresponded with this department and many of the staffers have problems receiving/sending email. It's a joke that this office should be setting IT policy in Australia

The proposal in the Australian report is to ban unsolicited commercial e-mail (opt-in). Now if only the US Senate would pay attention to that instead of introducing idiotic opt-out bills like the one recently introduced, that would actually increase spam.

The proposal in the Australian report is to ban unsolicited commercial e-mail (opt-in). Now if only the US Senate would pay attention to that instead of introducing idiotic opt-out bills like the one recently introduced, that would actually increase spam.

I'd just like to point out the National Office of Information Economy Interim Report on Spam

National Office of Information Economy,
The Spam Problem and How it can be Countered - Interim Report, Aug 2002,
[pdf]

While it is tempting to legislate Unsolicited Bulk Email out of existance (e.g. EU eCommerce directives), I think it might be better in the long-term for the governments to recognise the quasi-tribunal measures the private sector is establishing (SPEWS, RBL, etc). There's a test case in Perth at the moment (http://t3-v-mcnicol.org) which the government could take note of and if it gets to the appeal stage, might lead to de jure recognition of SPEWS and other abatement measures.

LL

Iseek have already made provision within the existing server software for the inclusion of a new category called "ABA". This category will include all URLs provided by the ABA in accordance with the take-down notices. Iseek would be able to accept the URLs via FTP etc.. and push the updated list out to all operational servers daily along with the normal daily list updates.

Again, this is old, and modifications in the Australian law render it no longer applicable. I eventually came to the conclusion that the "Australian" blacklist bit never got implemented (at least in what I could examine). So it seems that the bans works, operationally, by the Australian government just sending the sites to various censorware companies. The blacklisted sites are then just mixed into the general huge censorware blacklist itself.

Amusing footnote: A little before everything broke loose in What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org), I actually tried to enlist Michael Sims' support in my first idea for a technical attack on the Austrialian blacklist. This was because at the time he was well-positioned (as a "journalist", and also with other contacts) to take certain legal risks which I found extremely worrisome. No help whatsoever, in any form. Luckily, it seems not to have mattered.

Hello,

I read the article on the Sydney Morning Herald's web site, and came away more confused than anything else.

The quotation from Peter Coroneos (which I am assuming is the hotly-debated part) is truncated, which makes it rather hard to determine what he means. Is there a complete transcript of his interview? That would hopefully make things clearer.

Also, I'm curious as to why Australia's National Office of the Information Ecomony wants Robert Elz to relinquish stewardship of the .au domain. No one in the article seems to accuse him doing a bad, poor, or otherwise biased job; in fact, the article seems to indicate he is handling things well.

On an demi-related subject, it doesn't appear this is even a new subject. A quick search of the Internet found an article dated November, 1998 at the Law Office of Phillips Fox discussing this very issue.

Perhaps someone who is an involved party could provide more information.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky
- - -

I'm not trying to claim that civilisation as we know it will end without an IT industry, but if it weren't kinda important there wouldn't be a National Office for the Information Economy, would there?

My point was simply that regulation costs industry money. I know first hand that Ozemail have refused to run certain content for fear of litigation under the federal laws introduced last year. This is clearly making the industry uncompetitive on an international level and - although many US content providers haven't realised it - The Internet is an international media.

BTW, either you have a wild imagination or you fly a very nosey airline. I had to fill in some paperwork when I passed through customs in Singapore (October last year), but Singapore Airlines weren't about to throw me out of the plane before we landed :)

It's just like the Social Security Number (SSN) for the USA or other countries. Without it you cant get a Job or open a Bank account.

Since the TFN was introduced, "data matching" has been done between the Tax Office and Social Security to detect welfare fraud... This of course is promoted as saving the nation XX millions of dollars a year. But it also effectivly makes the TFN the universal ID number for Australia (linked to health & welfare)... goodbye privacy.

That is already the case in Nordic countries where the SSN system spans 5 countries, providing good social services of course, but eliminating alot of privacy. The SSN in nordic countries is linked to, Tax, employment, banking, insurance, city administration, driving licences, passports...

Privacy gone, but the people just accept it. Next year, national ID cards will even carry a SIM holding their very own digital signature... Very convenient, but not so private.

In summary, about Australia, successive governments have continued to chip away at personal privacy and freedoms...

For Example, the recently introduced Net regulation laws are an embarressment to the country and put it on the same level with third-world, police-state countries such as China and Vietnam. So much for the Information Economy.

I am glad I am no-longer in Australia to have to live with that.

--anonyymi raukka