[AusNOG] Australian Censorship program to go ahead - Gillard supports a the great firewall

[Brad Gould]

On 8/07/2010 12:41, Pinkerton, Eric wrote:
> If the gov't bans a film/book, and you go overseas, buy it and bring it
> back hidden in your luggage - are you therefore automatically free from
> prosecutuion because customs failed to find it?


No, because all the Government does when something is rated RC... is 
prevent it being sold or exhibited publicly.

Its not "banned".  It does not make it illegal to own or view.  You 
cannot screen the film in a cinema - so Conroy's rather disingenuous 
argument is correct but very misleading.

Brad




> Tell that to your cellmates in the excersise yard...
> PS
> IANAL
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
> [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Oskam
> *Sent:* Thursday, 8 July 2010 1:01 PM
> *To:* ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Australian Censorship program to go ahead -
> Gillard supports a the great firewall
>
> I think I already know the answer and the response that will be
> received..but I'll say it anyways.
>
> Let's say that I access a blacklisted website by bypassing the filter by
> whatever means.
>
> As the filter is supposed to be my safeguard against this content - Does
> this mean that if the filter, in one way or another, is ineffective in
> protecting me that I am not capable or being held criminally accountable?
>
> Further to this, If I choose to bypass the filter (which Conroy has
> indicated will not be considered an illegal activity) am I still free
> from being held criminally accountable?
>
> I guess what I am trying to say is, Who is meant to be held accountable
> for viewing such content? How is the filter really meant to be
> considered a safeguard if they are not intending to police the full
> extend of its effectiveness.
>
> As a citizen, I would think that if this holy grail of filters is meant
> to protect me - why is the government not prohibiting me from bypassing it?
>
> And if I am caught viewing such content and pulled to the side my the
> AFP - Then I would say to them that I assumed that I would be free to
> view the content because they did not specifically say that I couldn't
> bypass the system.
>
> To me (I'm going to use an analogy here), It seems as though the
> government is saying:
>
> "Well good sir, I don't want you to eat this cookie - but if you decide
> to ignore me and break the padlock I won't say anything :)"
>
> Food for thought?
>
> Andrew Oskam
>
> E percy at th3interw3bs.net
>
>
> NOTICE:
>
> These comments are my own personal opinions only and do not necessarily
> reflect the positions or opinions of my employer or their affiliates.
> All comments are based upon my current knowledge and my own personal
> experiences. You should conduct independent tests to verify the validity
> of any statements made in this email before basing any decisions upon
> those statements.
>
>

-- 
Brad Gould, Network Engineer
Internode
PO Box 284, Rundle Mall 5000
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide 5000
P: 08 8228 2999  F: 08 8235 6999
bradley at internode.com.au; http://www.internode.on.net/