

Australian government accused of sneaking in web filter - obtino
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/government-accused-of-sneaking-in-web-filter-20130517-2jq3p.html

======
JacobAldridge
Given the Australian government has now excised _the entire freaking country_
from the migration zone for asylum seekers, perhaps they should just excise
_all_ of the internet. Would be a darn sight quicker, cheaper and easier than
having to filter it one IP address at a time.

------
thisrod
The headline is a bit silly. People tried to help the cops stop a thief, but
stuffed up and inconvenienced bystanders. Those people happened to work for
ISPs. So what?

The real problem is the second order one: Australian cops are so bad at
prosecuting fraud that they resort to blocking websites instead of arresting
the people running them. A few websites going down is the least of the
consequences.

~~~
gilgoomesh
No, it wasn't the cops. No, it wasn't a thief. Legally, it wasn't anything:
there was no judge, no finding of fault, just a clumsy ban without due process
for secret reasons.

Banning anything (in this case, websites) without due process, accountability
and transparency is completely immoral. The fact that the Australian
government keeps trying to do it is abhorrent.

------
D4M14N
The little known law they quote is actually very well known if you are an ISP
/ carrier. But the law is not a legal mandatory filter requirement - just a
requirement that you "reasonably provide assistance when asked" It just
happened that most of the ISP's when asked in this case decided to comply, but
importantly not all complied.

~~~
caf
Well, what exactly legal obligations does that requirement impose on the ISP?
If they're allowed to refuse any request, then the law wouldn't be needed in
the first place - government agencies can certainly send whatever non-
enforceable requests they like without needing a specific law to let them do
so.

