New Zealand Looks at Internet Censorship

David writes "The New Zealand Government 'Select Committee', upon reviewing censorship law, has issued a report which among other things, recommends that ISPs face compulsory licensing "in order to control their behaviour", the forcing of a code of conduct upon ISPs, and recommends the implementation of an internet filtration programme not dissimilar from that of Australia's (although it is hazy on the details of what this would mean). They're starting to become really worried about the dangers of the internet."

Comments

Re:Can someone explain

[Anonymous Coward]

New Zealand film classification features two types of restriction; R, which means "you must be verifiably of a certain age to view the material". The second is a series of "guideline" classifications, which hint at the content, but are unrestricted.

For more details, see

http://www.movie-ratings.net/movieratings_nz.sht ml

Re:This is really interesting...

[EmbeddedJanitor]

'where is Old Zealand?' in Holland.

Re:Can someone explain

[jnzed]

All you ever wanted to know about Censorship in NZ:

• http://www.censorship.govt.nz/

Good old Telecom...

[The Ancients]

This is a country where the imcumbent Telco also owns about half of the Southern Cross Cable - the main data connection into the country (oh, and guess who owns another portion...).

This is a company that also limits the bandwidth available to customers through specific ports (think P2P). It doesn't matter that the customer has paid for the connection - they still tell (force?) you to use it as they want.

Prices for data? 128kb/s ADSL with 5GB monthly cap - NZ$65

up to 8Mb/s (usually around 2MB/s) ADSL (home) 500MB per month $49 1GB per month $69

up to 8MB/s (usually around 2MB/s) ADSL (home or business)

600MB - $62

1200MB - $120

1800MB - $176

3000MB - $292

5000MB - $458

10000MB - $888

20000MB - $1800

These are NZ$ (multiply by .6 to get $US equivalent) plus 12.5 % sales tax, and ISP fees, as this is just for the data flowing over Telecom's network.

And you thought sensorship was our biggest problem - I don't see why are they would sensor us anyway - it's not like we have the means, financially or technically to access much anyway.

And /.ers thought there wasn't a need for ASCII porn... ..k

Re:Can someone explain

[tigger]

The Films, Videos and Publication's Act requires all films for public exhibition to be classified. There are six standard classifications which may sometimes have a cautionary note attached.

G Suitable for general audiences of all ages.
PG Younger children may require parental guidance.
M Suitable for mature persons over 16 years of age.
R Restricted to persons over 16 years of age unless accompanied by a parent or guardian.
R16 Restricted to persons over 16 years of age only.
R18 Restricted to persons over 18 years of age only.

Re:Read the report

[waynemcdougall]

Agreed. Pages 55 onwards are specific to the Internet and the summary of recommendation are on page 68.

My summary on the key points made in the Internet section of the report are:

1. Child pornography and other obscene material is more readily available because of the Internet (and is already illegal material).
2. Peer to peer systems makes it harder to control the distribution of such material - suggests law changes to make clear offering files on a P2P system is "supply"
3. Recommending that filter software be made available (ideally free of charge)
4. Education of users should be encouraged
5. Live shows are not covered by censorship/classification rules - "let's change that"
6. Ability to execute a search warrant on grounds of possession, rather than trading
7. Have ISPs adopt a code of practice - if they don't (and NZ Telecom's Xtra is noted as dragging it's heels), then force one on them.

Nothing in there that alarms me too much.

Child pornography is the bogey man, and the vehicle on which everything else rides, if anything extreme is going to be introduced.

Internet Code of Practice

[waynemcdougall]

Have you read the (draft) Code of Practice?

The listed aims are:

• To ensure the fairness and accuracy of disclosure of business terms and conditions to the user public and community in general;
• To improve the standard of conduct within the industry;
• To provide public access to complaint handling and cost-effective redress mechanisms;
• To impose and regulate industry standards;
• To improve customer relations;
• To protect rights of access and free speech;
• To ensure that information and procedures are in place for the protection of minors from accessing objectionable material over the Internet;
• To ensure that the information and procedures are in place so Internet users know how to limit access to protect a user from accessing inappropriate or objectionable material

Note the positive phrasing - to protect the rights of access and free speech. I like that. In fact I like all of it. It seems very customer friendly. Which is why I expect Telecom's Xtra doesn't like it - it talks about the right of services being forwarded if you change providers - Xtra wouldn't like that. :-)

The onus is on the users, not the ISP to know how to protect themselves from objectionable content.

It suggests ratings systems like PICS. I have to say - it all looks good to me.