French Government decides to censor the Internet
RolandTD20Kdrummer
Posts: 13,066
Slowly but surely it seems...small but persistent changes.
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/06/10/french-government-decides
"THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT has apparently decided that it doesn’t much like being democratic, and that it would rather like to censor the Internet instead.
Not content with simply limiting itself to blocking despicable child sex abuse, a move three major ISPs in the US also agreed to today, the French government feels it necessary to go a radical step further and decide for its citizens whether or not they can view content it considers inappropriately racist and or linked to terrorism.
In fact, worse still is that any site is now game for a French blockade, as Sarkozy’s government is inviting people to send in huge long lists of sites which offend their delicate sensibilities. The French government, which will purportedly be able to receive complaints from Internet users in real time, will be able to add sites to a so called “black list”, which it will then force national ISPs to block.
The move, announced by France’s Interior Minister, Michel Alliot-Marie, is France’s way of showing it is indeed taking a strong stand against cyber-criminality, but it seems that the line between ‘strong’ and ‘authoritarian’ is a little fuzzy on this one.
Alliot-Marie, only caring to justify the block on child sex abuse sites, noted “Other democracies have done it. France could wait no longer". She added that all of France’s Internet Service Providers had agreed to comply with the new regulations which go into effect as of September.
The minister vehemently denied that the French government was turning itself into "a Big Brother of the Internet" and promised that the "fundamental liberty that is Internet access" would continue to thrive. As long as people only see the sites the government allows them to see, of course. "
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/06/10/french-government-decides
"THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT has apparently decided that it doesn’t much like being democratic, and that it would rather like to censor the Internet instead.
Not content with simply limiting itself to blocking despicable child sex abuse, a move three major ISPs in the US also agreed to today, the French government feels it necessary to go a radical step further and decide for its citizens whether or not they can view content it considers inappropriately racist and or linked to terrorism.
In fact, worse still is that any site is now game for a French blockade, as Sarkozy’s government is inviting people to send in huge long lists of sites which offend their delicate sensibilities. The French government, which will purportedly be able to receive complaints from Internet users in real time, will be able to add sites to a so called “black list”, which it will then force national ISPs to block.
The move, announced by France’s Interior Minister, Michel Alliot-Marie, is France’s way of showing it is indeed taking a strong stand against cyber-criminality, but it seems that the line between ‘strong’ and ‘authoritarian’ is a little fuzzy on this one.
Alliot-Marie, only caring to justify the block on child sex abuse sites, noted “Other democracies have done it. France could wait no longer". She added that all of France’s Internet Service Providers had agreed to comply with the new regulations which go into effect as of September.
The minister vehemently denied that the French government was turning itself into "a Big Brother of the Internet" and promised that the "fundamental liberty that is Internet access" would continue to thrive. As long as people only see the sites the government allows them to see, of course. "
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Still waiting on the US Government to define obscenity.
Government forbid we actually have to think for and censor ourselves and the content we see.
What does suck though is that our dickhead president of the equivalent of the RIAA said that if blocking pedophile sites was possible, blocking sites breaching copyrights should be possible too.
sources please.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
"There is no deal signed today (11th of june) [...]
We do not wish to become big brothers, or have the users be afraid of us [...]
The text proposed mixed ISP and hosts, they are not the same. A filter would be too expensive and technical to do" president of the ISP association.
If they're already setting up framework to block pedophile sites, then it's not too expensive to employ a couple of people to add various pages to the filter. The technology is already in place to filter content at that point. All they have to do is replicate their filtering masks. Simple text files, a few minutes...voila. Heck, most consumer internet routers have web filters built in already.
Again this is what they (govt) says. I'm basically at the point now where I assume everything govt officials tell us with regards to personal rights, and privacy issues, is as lie until I see evidence indicating otherwise.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2008/06/will_cable_comp.html
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I agree, there is a dangerous slide towards loss of choice these days in "neocon" countries (I don't how to call these people like Sarkozy, Berlusconi or Bush who chose the inconvenients of both socialism and capitalism like model for the society).
But I don't think people will let it slide to the point where you're not allowed to go/see what you want, especially on a popular media like the web. I may be overly optimistic but that's what I think.
That's a fair argument, I mean humans have always gotten around the government to succede in spite of the government in many ways regarding censorship. It's almost funny to observe the prudish public nature of some countries and see all the obvious skeletons in the closet when it comes to anything done in the home or in other private places. The thing with the web is that everyone essentially gets thier access from an ISP. If the ISP can or must censor information where does it end? We already see instances of controlled information in China.... why? because the truth would anger the public and might insight revolutionary thought. Any idea out of the regulated is quickly squashed and the creator imprisoned. I'm honestly concerned about this kind of thing happening in this country too. I definately don't want to see that, but I mean in the end what else can you be but optimistic.....? It's like putting parental locks on everything. Some of us prefer to make our own choices.
It isn't just neocons, unless China is run by neocons. It is statists who think government knows best. And in this country both Democrats and Republicans and fighting hand over fist to increase the scope and reach of government. And voters keep asking for more.
I think neocons describes well this mix between finance laissez-faire and intrusive security laws.
Got ya. I agree that the neocons have used this to their advantage. It just seems like every government, no matter their category or label, will continue to grow and become more intrusive as long as people keep asking for more from them.