[AusNOG] Hyperlink fines from ACMA [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Wed Mar 18 09:36:05 EST 2009

According to Whirlpool posts the content assessment team is made up of
400 matronly figures with scowls who dedicate their lives to ruining all
your fun (the other 120 or so are HR and Finance people). Last I saw
it's around 8 or so people in their 20s and 30s who are really quite
friendly - I've never once seen any of them breathe fire.

The Content Assessment team operate under the Broadcasting Services Act
(http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/0/90112
3C9D49C409BCA25755C0014FCC7/$file/BroadServ1992Vol1_WD02.pdf). To give
you a VERY brief primer the government writes (or revises) an Act, the
Senate reviews it, then it gives power to the people in charge of ACMA
to enforce it (the "Authority" in the acronym). 

The Authority then delegate down the power to the Content Assessment
Team to carry through with a very difficult job I wouldn't consider
doing myself (there are things you can't un-see, these people must see
them every day). From the January figures (which I happened to have on
my desk) they actioned 7 complaints on R Sexual content (without access
restrictions), 1 bit of refused classification violence, 3 instructions
on paedophilia, 45 instances of pictures of it, 2 bestiality based sites
and 3 "sexual fetish" complaints (what I can only assume is hard
bondage/simulated rape? not sure).

Anyway, these folks assess complaints on the basis of what's in the Act
and in their best judgement carry through with the powers as detailed in
the Act. More information can be found at
http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_90102 . Anyone who is
interested in educating themselves about all this stuff I'd encourage to
look up the "Explanatory Memoranda" of any bills that alter the Act.
Besides the actual text of the Act they give a bit of a crib sheet for
what the intention is behind the changes. I had a really good example
but I unfortunately can't find it now - it was about the changes to the
prohibited content list to include terrorism stuff if I recall
correctly.

None of this is my area of expertise (I spend my days fighting botnets
and spammers) so take it as a rough guide. My training in political
science is predominately from Year 10 Social Sciences and I am a lot
more at home in a debugger than a piece of legislation :)
As you can probably tell this is my own private opinion and does not
necessarily represent the views of ACMA etc etc.

Cheers,
Kayne

________________________________

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Jay Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, 17 March 2009 8:45 PM
To: 'Skeeve Stevens'
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Hyperlink fines from ACMA

These are really good questions Skeeve.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if they'd have a go at a .com.au located
offshore, with a link to a site on their super secret blacklist.
Presuming that they wouldn't would be assuming that they have technical
clue.. (if in fact their stipulation is that the site is physically
located in .au)

Grahame's statement re: catch22 is an excellent point. I presume they
send a cease and desist prior to the fines starting? Better make sure
your whois data is up-to-date!

So what happens if your site located in .au contains a link to a site
offshore which contains a link to one of the sites on their blacklist?
Are you still in breach? This scenario isn't outside the realm of
possibility (IMHO).

--Jay

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Skeeve Stevens
Sent: Tuesday, 17 March 2009 8:29 PM
To: Grahame Lynch
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Hyperlink fines from ACMA

Excellent Grahame!

Now let's try for further clarification!

Do you think this relates to data hosted by an Australian
'company/individual/etc' or actually onshore in the Commonwealth of
Australia.

Could Bulletproof move the Whirlpool website to a US physical server*
(see below), and tell the ACMA where to go?

* Is there a difference between having your own 'owned' servers in the
US, or if you resell another US hosting farm?

I really hope this is as simple as 'move it offshore' or 'I will move it
to one of my US (or wherever for FTA issues) servers, and then tell the
ACMA where to go'.

Also... If someone reports a complaint to the ACMA... I assume they are
doing so because they 'think' it is hosted in Australia.  This would
probably be guessed by the .au domain name we can assume.

Are .au domain named hosted on US servers safe? Or does the ACMA think
they have a say?  Is the first thing the ACMA does is a traceroute
(which could be misleading), and if it is outside out borders... they
respond to the complainant 'Sorry, can't help you'.

I am not advocating any particular method to avoiding the ACMA's
powers... I believe there is much badness on the internet which should
be blocked (not supporting national filters though) but I just want to
understand EXACTLY the extent of their authority and powers so I can
advise people appropriately until they change.

...Skeeve

--

Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director

eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists

skeeve at eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net

Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve

--

NOC, NOC, who's there?

Disclaimer: Limits of Liability and Disclaimer: This message is for the
named person's use only. It may contain sensitive and private
proprietary or legally privileged information. You must not, directly or
indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this
message if you are not the intended recipient. eintellego Pty Ltd and
each legal entity in the Tefilah Pty Ltd group of companies reserve the
right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.  Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised
to state them to be the views of any such entity. Any reference to
costs, fee quotations, contractual transactions and variations to
contract terms is subject to separate confirmation in writing signed by
an authorised representative of eintellego. Whilst all efforts are made
to safeguard inbound and outbound e-mails, we cannot guarantee that
attachments are virus-free or compatible with your systems and do not
accept any liability in respect of viruses or computer problems
experienced.

From: Grahame Lynch [mailto:grahamelynch at commsdaymail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 17 March 2009 8:15 PM
To: Skeeve Stevens
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Hyperlink fines from ACMA

Skeeve I usually lurk here but as a publisher who is conscious of my
legal liabilities my first thought is this - an Australian web hoster
will have to think long and hard about hosting any form of relatively
lightly moderated message board.

I know Whirlpool is modded but by volunteers without full legal
training.

It will basically create the equivalent of 1970s UK pirate radio
stations on oil rigs off the coast - no website with any potential for
liability would want to be caught dead in ACMA's regulatory domicile. As
far as I am aware ACMA only has authority over content hosted in
Australia (including those publishing hyperlinks to prohibited content).
So the incentive is to leave the domicile basically.

Given the list of prohibited links is supposed to be secret how does a
web moderator really know if a poster has posted an offending link until
they are already in breach? Catch 22.

I currently run websites out of Australia but all this is a potential
nightmare, especially given one of my core topics of competence in my
content is critiquing the censors.. I intend to move as much of my
activity and potential liability offshore as is practicable.

2009/3/17 Skeeve Stevens <skeeve at eintellego.net>

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/banned-hyperlinks-could-cost-you-1
1000-a-day/2009/03/17/1237054787635.html

Most people would have read about the above link.

I think it is stupid, and I'd like to know where they get off stopping
people seeing something about anti-abortion, but... that aside.

My question is... the ACMA.... who do they have authority over?

Options:

*	Websites hosted in Australia 
*	Websites hosted under .au domains 
*	Australian citizens 
*	Anyone they goddamn please 

Do they have any authority of a .au website hosted in the US?  Or if
it's run by an Aussie, does it not matter?

Shouldn't they be going after the website owner (Whirlpool) as opposed
to the host? (Bulletproof)

This is concerning and I have people asking questions, and I would like
to inform them appropriately.

This is my first thought about this, and I haven't googled, searched
their website or anything, because I am interested in the opinions of
others here as well.

...Skeeve

--

Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director

eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists

skeeve at eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net <http://www.eintellego.net/> 

Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve

--

NOC, NOC, who's there?

Disclaimer: Limits of Liability and Disclaimer: This message is for the
named person's use only. It may contain sensitive and private
proprietary or legally privileged information. You must not, directly or
indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this
message if you are not the intended recipient. eintellego Pty Ltd and
each legal entity in the Tefilah Pty Ltd group of companies reserve the
right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.  Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised
to state them to be the views of any such entity. Any reference to
costs, fee quotations, contractual transactions and variations to
contract terms is subject to separate confirmation in writing signed by
an authorised representative of eintellego. Whilst all efforts are made
to safeguard inbound and outbound e-mails, we cannot guarantee that
attachments are virus-free or compatible with your systems and do not
accept any liability in respect of viruses or computer problems
experienced.

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-- 
Grahame Lynch
Ph/SMS: +668 1701 7664
Skype: grahame.lynch
URL: www.commsday.com

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the email and any attachments to it. The information contained in this email and any attachments may be private, confidential and legally privileged or the subject of copyright. If you are not the addressee it may be illegal to review, disclose, use, forward, or distribute this email and/or its contents.

Unless otherwise specified, the information in the email and any attachments is intended as a guide only and should not be relied upon as legal or technical advice or regarded as a substitute for legal or technical advice in individual cases. Opinions contained in this email or any of its attachments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of ACMA.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20090318/4f30d777/attachment.html>