Porn filters free from July

Content filtering software -- from five vendors -- is set to become freely available from July as part of the government's program to combat offensive online content.

The AU$93.3 million National Filter Scheme will see the vendors' software provided via free download from a government portal. The vendors will be determined by a request for tender issued last week.

The "late July" launch of the scheme, according to the request for tender, is the latest slip in its schedule. The scheme has been beset by delays since being announced by Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan last year.

In the tender, the government provided more detail of the scheme, designed to alleviate what it cited as community concern over the ease with which children can access offensive Internet content.

Users will be able to download the filtering software from the government portal -- yet to be set up -- until 30 June, 2009. They can also choose to receive the product by mail.

The filters will also be available to public libraries within Australia.

Although free, the filters are not expected to be of lesser quality than their off-the-shelf versions.

"The Government's expectation is that [the] PC filter product supplied under the Scheme must be the same as those supplied in comparable markets to Australia, including in relation to the provision of patches and updates," the tender said.

"[They] must provide all customers who install their PC filter product under the Scheme with all patches."

The government would choose at least one product capable of blocking chat applications on the Mac operating system, as well as at least one for blocking the same applications on Windows, according to the tender.

The vendors would also be required to provide technical support to users of the filters until 30 June, 2010. Call centres capable of meeting expected demand must also be set-up before the launch date, said the tender.

Under the terms of the scheme, the government will cover the vendors' licensing and support costs. However, this would be reliant on the vendor's product achieving a minimum level of take-up from users, to be agreed by the government and vendor.

"Where a vendor does not achieve a critical level of take-up of their PC filter agreed between the Government and the vendor, the Government may withdraw the vendor from participation in the Scheme," said the tender.

The filters will only be available to Australian residents.

An advertising campaign will accompany the launch of the free filters.

See our exclusive coverage of the Election 07: Coonan vs Conroy debate

Advertisement

Talkback 8 comments

  1. what the....??? Anonymous -- 07/05/07

    $93 MILLION? This is absolutely outragous. Coonan is out of her depth if this is the best solution she can come up with. Whats wrong with an ISP hosted filter, or a govt hosted filter??? At least the kids wont be able to get around this.

    1. Why Anonymous -- 08/05/07

      why should all users suffer the performance hits to the net that ISP or government filters would generate and also pay extra per month to cover the ISP costs in running such a filter.
      Let the filter be on the home PC where it belongs

    2. because... Anonymous -- 08/05/07

      This is only happening because the govt does not want to take personal responsibility for providing a service like this.
      Distributing software at that cost is just plain silly.
      And I dont believe that ISP's will take a performance hit at all, only the people who decide to use the filter get the delays, not the rest of us.

  2. Pointless Julian Clark -- 08/05/07

    Seriously, this is pointless, spending this much money on a system that won't work.

    It might reduce the chances of your kiddies accessing inappropriate content, but it cannot guarantee it. Will it deal with encrypted content? Surely not.

    Will there be flaws and workarounds? Certainly.

    Will it be as effective as supervising your children on the internet? Never!

    1. 1 Grand to the first Aussie porn company that gets around it Anonymous -- 08/05/07

      Who bets that Aussie porn firms will be competing big time to get around this thing...The government are SO STUPID, why didn't they just agree to the XXX domain name, then block it, and procecute anyone putting porn up on non-XXX domain names?

    2. I like that idea Anonymous -- 08/05/07

      That certainly makes sense.

  3. not much of a challenge. Anonymous -- 08/05/07

    hmm I wonder if it'll be as simple as a google image search with the filters turned off.

  4. ROFL Dommy -- 11/05/07

    I needed a good laugh.
    Possible work arounds
    1. Whiz kid who knows more than parents
    2. Mates of Whiz Kid
    3. Holes in filter
    4. Filter blocks appropriate sites , so annoying parent turns of filter
    5. Linux
    Result - waste of tax payers money fighting non problem

Add your opinion


Latest Videos

ZDNet's CIO Vision Series

Department of Defence | Greg Farr, CIO (part two)

In the second part of his interview, Defence CIO Greg Farr talks about outsourcing, the skills crisis and reveals his most urgent IT priority.

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Angus Kidman I'm a celebrity, don't back me up
    Celebrity comes with its perks — free alcohol, better-looking partners, lots of holiday time — and disadvantages — constant media intrusions, being forced to appear in films with Eddie Murphy for the long-term good of your career, and having to do mindless radio interviews with angry men who've been awake since 4am.
  • Array Lies, damned lies and telco stupidity
    Earlier this month, Telstra put out a press release trumpeting that it's come up with a new phone coaching service to help people who are "bamboozled" by their mobiles. Another excellent example of wrongheaded thinking from the mobile industry.
  • Array Dear carriers: More walking, less talking
    Sometimes, a well-placed and well-timed letter can make all the difference. Other times, it can make no difference at all — and even hurt your case. This week's missive by the Competitive Carriers' Coalition, I would suggest, falls into the latter category.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured