The five year deal will see Nextgen extend its existing cable network, which was recently selected for the Federal Government's $250 million regional blackspots backhaul program. The deal expanded Nextgen's 8,000 kilometre longhaul network by a further 6,000 kilometres, however the Commonwealth has retained ownership of the actual cable. Nextgen has the right to sell access to the network for the next five years.

Chief executive of Nextgen, Phil Sykes told ZDNet.com.au while Telstra owned and operated substantially more longhaul than Nextgen, the regional backhaul deal would put it "way up there" and close to Optus' own longhaul network.

Nextgen's network after Conroy's $250 million offer
(Credit: DBCDE)

Defence chief information officer, Greg Farr, has previously commented that Defence's communications network was in need of a refresh. Defence recently committed to a $1 billion over ten year campaign to upgrade its information and communications technology systems.

Comments (0) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Defence bigwigs get IT minder
• iiNet stands firm on legislative defence
• Defence to post major ICT tenders
• Defence overhauls ICT spending

A spokesperson for Xenophon told ZDNet.com.au that the South Australian-based senator's stance on the proposed system had not been changed by the ISP filter trial report's release this week.

Xenophon has previously said the mandatory ISP filter plan was unworkable because it would slow down internet speeds and block content inaccurately. Today, he remains the only senator clearly opposed to the proposal. Greens senator Scott Ludlam said yesterday it was a "misguided" policy, and his party would seek to make "significant amendments" to the proposal.

It's not yet clear how important the independents' votes will be come 2010, given that currently the Liberal party remains in limbo over the proposed system. Fellow independent Steve Fielding has commended the plan, leaving Xenophon, in his outright rejection of the proposal, the only senator to clearly oppose the proposed amendment to the Broadcasting Act which would see all ISPs implement filtering systems by mid-2011.

Smith, Conroy's new shadow, has cautiously promised to review the filter trial report commissioned by the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, while opposition leader Tony Abbott yesterday did not come down on either side of the policy.

Comments (1) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Abbott drawn into filter debate
• Abbott: NBN plans crazier than Whitlam
• Google slams 'heavy-handed' filter
• Constitution opened filter door: Expert

Tuesday saw the government release a report on service delivery by the Economic Audit Committee. The report recognised that technology allowed the government to build relationships with the people of the state in a cost-effective manner and enabled networking. It also recognised that IT had not always been handled well in the state.

"Governments and businesses around the world have often struggled with the implementation of ICT infrastructure. Western Australia is no different," the report said. There had been successes, but also times where the government had fallen behind its contemporaries, it said.

"Too often, agencies have demanded that ICT solutions be retro-fitted to create updated versions of existing systems and processes, rather than fundamentally reforming their systems and processes. This approach reduces the effectiveness and increases the cost and time frames of ICT projects."

The committee felt that to make sure the government used technology in a strategic manner it needed a "well resourced" chief information officer to decide on how goals could be met via IT and also a chief technology officer who would be in charge of procurement, standards and system consolidation.

The committee recommended that the roles be created and filled by December 2010.

The report also recommended that the way people dealt with the government be streamlined, using the discussions being held by the Federal Government's Government 2.0 Taskforce as a building block.

"At a minimum, the government's online presence should be easy to navigate, and provide citizens with up-to-date information about services and regulations organised around their needs rather than the administrative structures of government," the committee's report said.

The committee recommended that the community's interaction be simplified by consolidating processing and administration to a single point in government. Payments and concessions could be made easier via new systems, to be developed by 2011. The committee also recommended trialling a smart card for the purpose (on a voluntary basis) by December 2011.

The recommendations will be considered over the next few months.

Comments (1) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Melbourne Airport's Mark Funston: CIO profile
• NSW Health CIO leaves role
• Q&A: Acting Queensland CIO, Alan Chapman
• Salmat appoint new CIO

An audit report released yesterday found many customers did not make complaints even when they had a valid reason and were dissatisfied with the complaints handling process.

The Do Not Call Register (DNCR) is a list of home and personal mobile telephone numbers which telemarketers are legally forbidden to call. Since its launch in May 2007, consumers have listed 3.83 million of an estimated 20 million eligible home and mobile numbers on the register.

ACMA research found 75 per cent of consumers surveyed in June 2009 were aware of the register. This research found for the majority of respondents, the register was effective in reducing the number of unwanted marketing calls. In addition, ACMA reported a 60 per cent drop in the number of complaints about unwanted calls from 2007-08 to 2008-09.

Despite this awareness, ACMA's promotional activities had been "limited in effectively educating consumers on how the register and the DNCR Scheme operate", the audit report found.

"Consumers' awareness of how they should make a complaint is low; and the ACMA's data shows that there is a relatively high number of registrants who do not make a complaint when they potentially have a valid reason to do so.

"Without an understanding of the types of calls that a registrant may continue to receive, how long it takes for a registration to take effect and the duration of the registration period, there is an increased risk that consumers could make misinformed complaints and be dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the register in reducing unwanted calls."

ACMA lacked information on why consumers did or didn't make complaints and how satisfied they were with the complaints handling process, the audit found.

"Capturing and using complaints that are received presents a valuable resource to the ACMA as they provide the information on which it bases and targets its compliance efforts. It is therefore important that it collects more complete complaint information and that complainants have confidence in the complaint handling process."

The auditor-general also noted that approximately 1 million numbers on the register would soon be reaching the end of the three-year registration period, which would be "a key upcoming test" for ACMA.

Since its launch, ACMA received more than 37,000 complaints relating to unwanted phone calls. In response, it sent 948 advisory letters and 301 warning letters to telemarketing companies.

In cases where these letters failed to reduce the number of complaints against a company, ACMA instigated 33 investigations and completed 24. These resulted in eight formal warnings, eight infringement notices (which included financial penalties) and 10 enforceable undertakings.

Internet service provider Dodo received the largest ever infringement notice of $147,000 last year. ACMA is now taking one company to the Federal Court for failing to pay an infringement notice.

Comments (0) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Constitution opened filter door: Expert
• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• An open letter to Stephen Conroy
• Enex: Filtering effective, negligible impact

In a post on her blog, Sharpe called Conroy's announcement "a backward step that if adopted will be a triumph of fear and false promise over what works and good sense".

"The Federal Government's proposals to filter the internet are a waste of time, a waste of money, a false promise to parents that will not stop kids being exposed to undesirable content online and a move towards censorship that a democratic and free nation like Australia should reject," she said.

"The proposed internet filter creates a diversion from tackling broader issues of how the online environment (which also includes mobile phones and games) is rapidly changing social norms, expectations and behaviour.

"There are urgent issues that need to be addressed: protecting children from inappropriate material, protecting privacy, cyberstalking and bullying, how to protect citizens from identity theft to name just a few.

"The solution to these issues is not a mandatory filter."

The solutions include increased education for parents and kids, more policing and investigation, more resources for families and communities, and law reform in the areas of privacy and communications, she added.

"I urge the Federal Government to consider other options rather than this proposal," she concluded.

In the comments on her blog post, Sharpe urged readers to write to Senator Conroy and make the case against censorship.

"I am not brave for speaking out about this issue," she said. "I am a state MP who does not actually have to make the decision. Without going into chapter and verse about the way parliamentary Labor caucuses work, just because there is not public dissent does not mean that there is no dissent."

Federal Labor Senator Kate Lundy, an outspoken critic of internet censorship when she was in opposition, refused to comment on the proposed legislation yesterday.

Comments (2) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Sex Party fears end of net porn
• Abbott drawn into filter debate
• Google slams 'heavy-handed' filter
• Constitution opened filter door: Expert

New Zealand-born Lance Thomas Atkinson, 26, has admitted to being involved in a large-scale spam-sending operation that delivered emails to internet users all over the world.

On Wednesday, both his defence lawyer and the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) submitted to the Federal Court in Brisbane that he receive a $210,000 penalty for the offences, but Justice Andrew Greenwood reserved his decision until Tuesday (December 22).

"Citizens find these things highly annoying and he was at the centre of it," said Justice Greenwood after hearing that 140,000 reports had been received.

After ACMA delivered Justice Greenwood written submissions, which were not read out, the court heard the spamming occurred over a period of 14 months and that Atkinson, from the Sunshine Coast, was involved in recruiting spammers.

Outside the court, ACMA anti-spam team manager Julia Cornwell McKean said the agency had received 140,000 reports from customers who had provided examples. "So these were just the tip of the iceberg, we're talking about big numbers here," McKean said.

It has previously been reported that Atkinson, who has already been fined $16 million by US authorities and also fined in New Zealand, had a computer system capable of sending up to 10 billion emails per day.

McKean said one of the prime examples of the spam emails sent were herbal products to improve men's sex lives. "These emails get sent to people's inbox every day and people are just sick of them," McKean said.

"We're not clear about the actual income that resulted from this but I'd say it was most likely substantial."

McKean said although the maximum penalty was $1.1 million per day of offending, due to Atkinson's cooperation with ACMA they able to cut down on legal costs and therefore only requested a $210,000 penalty. She said future penalties would increase if Atkinson reoffended.

She said in order for electronic advertising messages not to be considered spam, a company needed permission to send a message, state who they were and give people the opportunity to unsubscribe.

Under the Spam Act, individuals found guilty can only receive civil penalty provisions and not jail time.

Comments (0) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Lundy: My filter views 'well known'
• US fines NZ spammer US$15.15m
• Coke, Vodafone, pinned for spamming
• AFACT bombarded iiNet with breach notices

Centrelink, Medicare and other smaller organisations will become part of the Human Services department, bringing together their back office functions, including IT, by the end of next year. Centrelink CIO John Wadeson will head up the new IT force which will take shape by the end of 2010. The services will be co-located with 20 offices to be moved together by the end of next year, and 40 offices by 2012.

The reforms would save money, Bowen said, which Human Services intended to plough back into its service delivery. Any staff reduction would come from natural attrition he said, but stressed that the reforms were mainly about moving staff from basic tasks to service delivery rather than retrenching them. A Centrelink spokesperson said that they understood this would also hold for IT staff.

Bowen also heralded a technology upgrade to enable easier transfer of information between the agencies so that customers will have the option to pre-fill forms.

"You shouldn't have to remember multiple usernames and passwords for multiple websites. The upgrade of online services is in response to an ever-increasing demand for this option," he said. "Technology is revolutionising how services can be — and are — delivered but, without broader changes, it can actually exacerbate the confusion and information overload," he said.

Human Services hoped to make all forms online compatible by 2013, according to Bowen. Currently Human Services supports over 17 million online transactions a year. However, he said he wouldn't force people to use the online services.

The minister's office has not yet answered queries as to how much the agency intended to spend on the upgrade, or save from the consolidation. It has also not yet indicated if it would hire any external help.

The easy flow of information did not mean that the government would have a master file on the department's customers, Bowen said. "We will not house an individual's personal sensitive information in one place, vesting all control with one body or one card. This is not an Australia Card and we will not be merging agency databases," he said.

The idea was to bring IT platforms together, not information, he said. "Apart from the limited data that is already shared between agencies like Medicare and Centrelink, no more information will be shared, unless the individual concerned asks us to share the information for their convenience," he said.

Human Services had been working with the privacy commissioner from the beginning, he said, working on a memorandum of understanding to cover the reforms. Personal health information in particular will be excluded from the reforms because of its particular sensitivity.

Comments (0) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• NSW human services CIOs stand firm
• Centrelink scans its way to $131.3m
• The big 27,000: Win7 ensnares Centrelink
• Centrelink testing Windows 7

Fiona Patten, spokesperson for ASP, which is aiming for a spot in the Senate, told ZDNet.com.au today that Minister for Communications Stephen Conroy had backtracked on promises he had made to the party while in opposition.

"He said, 'Don't worry, we're not going to try and stop adults from viewing what they want. This isn't about cracking down on adults'," said Patten.

However, Patten said that around 4 million adult websites from around the globe, including those that most people would consider "mainstream", would be blocked by the filters due to Australia's classification system for x-rated content.

"When we say refused classification, we're talking sexually abusive language, any form of fetish... It's not illegal material, it's just something that John Howard in his wisdom cut out of x-rated classification," said Patten.

"I don't think people are aware of how the classification system works in Australia. Australia has one of the strictest classification systems in the world for adult material," she said.

The problem with applying a mandatory filter to all refused classification (RC) content online was that Australia's censorship laws were much stricter than those of overseas counterparts. Content created in the UK, South Africa, US and Canada typically does not comply with Australia's x-rated classification for standard media such as DVDs, meaning that they need to be edited prior to being sold in Australia. Patten believes this will be problematic for content accessed over the internet.

"Ninety-nine per cent of all films that are created outside Australia must be edited to meet the X-classification. If they are not, they are refused classification. So every website in the world that features unedited content will be an RC site," said Patten.

"It will block what most people would consider mainstream sites such as Penthouse.com," said Patten.

Other sites that would be blocked would include xtube, redtube and youporn, said Patten. "And there's a new one, iporn, and that's actually doing a lot of traffic. It has material that is RC."

Patten said the ASP now had over 3000 members and that "this filter will do nothing but good for the Australian Sex Party."

"We will try to bring 4 million Australians who access these websites on a regular basis into action," said Patten.

Comments (1) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Google slams 'heavy-handed' filter
• Abbott drawn into filter debate
• Constitution opened filter door: Expert
• Optus supports ISP filter

Tony Abbott
(Credit: Tony Abbott)

In a doorstop interview at the Westin Hotel in Sydney today, he was asked if he thought the filter was desirable or feasible. Abbott admitted he wasn't versed in the details of the legislation and stayed firmly with one foot on both sides of the fence.

"I think that it makes sense to try to ensure that the homes of Australia aren't invaded with pornography via the internet," he said. "On the other hand I don't want to see wider censorship and I don't want to see the internet destroyed as a tool for people's education or as a tool for people's businesses."

What it came down to was a question of whether it was technically feasible, according to Abbott. Yet he wasn't willing to air his thoughts on the matter. "I just don't know enough about it at this stage to have an opinion on that," he said.

Shadow Communications Minister Tony Smith has stated his desire to carry out an independent audit of Enex TestLab's report which recorded the results of the filtering trial. The trial tested how effective filtering was when used by internet service providers in a live environment and whether it effected internet speeds.

Enex found that filtering from a blacklist did not significantly affect performance but that it was easily circumvented.

Comments (9) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Abbott: NBN plans crazier than Whitlam
• Constitution opened filter door: Expert
• Google slams 'heavy-handed' filter
• Optus supports ISP filter

"Australia does not have a Bill of Rights which protects free speech at a federal level," said Williams, the Anthony Mason Professor of law at the University of New South Wales. "We don't have the protections that they have in every other democratic country.

"That means Australia might be subject to far more stringent regulations on the internet than would be possible in other democratic countries," he told ZDNet.com.au this morning in the wake of the revelation of the government's plans to filter Australia's internet for objectionable content.

For example, the degree of censorship proposed by the Australian government would be almost impossible in the United States because that country's constitution guarantees freedom of speech.

"They might be able to have internet filters that just restricted child pornography but not the breadth being considered here," Williams said. By contrast, the Australian constitution only guarantees freedom of speech in selected circumstances such as allowing political communication and criticism of politicians, he explained.

This could open the door to a regime that censored "a significant number of sites that are not illegal" and that would "separate Australia from the great bulk of Western liberal democracies", according to a report by three senior media studies academics released today.

The report, Untangling the Net: The Scope of Content Caught By Mandatory Internet Filtering by Professor Catharine Lumby from the University of New South Wales, Professor Lelia Green from Edith Cowan University and Professor John Hartley from the Queensland University of Technology, was highly critical of the model proposed yesterday by Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy, a blacklist of overseas sites similar to the one currently maintained by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

"One of the clear risks of focusing disproportionate public policy attention and public resources on content regulation is that many parents and teachers may gain a false sense of security when it comes to the material their children encounter online," the report warned. "This risk is particularly high in a regulatory system that relies on a blacklist which, by its very nature, will only capture and represent a small sample of the online material of concern."

The report found that only 32 per cent of the sites on ACMA's blacklist related to child pornography, with the remainder comprising content that had been classified R18+, X18+, RC and unspecified.

"If a mandatory internet filtering regime were to be implemented along similar regulatory lines to the current classification system used by the ACMA in the formation of their blacklist then it is likely that the scope of filtered content will not include just illegal content (such as child pornography) but also prohibited content (such as material rated X18+ or material rated MA15+, R18+ and not subject to appropriate restricted access systems)."

"The ACMA is blacklisting a significant number of sites that are not illegal content but are considered offensive."

"While this may be considered acceptable where filtering is opt-in by an end user (or parent for family computers), under a mandatory filtering regime this would result in capturing material that is clearly legal but restricted in availability (off the internet) through classification restrictions."

If it were introduced, Australia would be the only liberal democracy in the world to have a mandatory internet censorship regime, the report found.

"The proposal would set Australia apart from other Western liberal democracies that have opted for a transparent, voluntary filtering regime that involves interactions between governments, the police, advocacy groups, ISPs, not-for-profit organisations and the general public in determining how to counteract access to undesirable content. This approach has been successfully applied in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand."

Comments (7) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Lundy: My filter views 'well known'
• Google slams 'heavy-handed' filter
• Pirate Party, Greens battle Conroy's filter
• Do you support a mandatory internet filter?

"Optus has always supported measures that will protect its customers from illegal content, and give greater peace of mind to those using the internet," said Optus director of Government and Corporate Affairs, Maha Krishnapillai. "This initiative supports the blocking of access to the worst types of online content such as child abuse and sexual violence."

In the statement, Optus claimed that the filter would not have an adverse effect on internet speed.

"Through its participation in the government's filtering pilot, Optus confirmed that it is technically feasible to block a finite list of illegal content without significant impact on the customer's experience or network performance," said Krishnapillai.

The telco believes that the mandatory blocking of refused classification (RC) content is important.

"But (it) must be complemented with a broader government approach to cyber-safety and the protection of children on the internet, including initiatives to promote education, awareness and counselling," said Krishnapillai.

According to the statement, Optus has been in talks with the government and other major ISPs and will be involved in further consultations around the implementation of the filter.

"Optus acknowledges that it is the government's responsibility to strike a balance between protecting Australians' desire for freedom of expression and access to information, with the need to improve online safety and limit access to illegal RC content," said Krishnapillai.

Optus has declined to comment further on this matter.

Comments (15) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• Telstra supports Conroy's filter
• Industry welcomes filter policy
• EFA: Filtering 'damages Australia's reputation'

NBN Co executive chairman Mike Quigley said Flannigan's experience in the engineering and construction industries qualifies him to oversee the construction on the NBN's infrastructure.

"His expertise will be invaluable when applied to this critical role overseeing the build of the large, complex infrastructure project that is the National Broadband Network," Quigley said in a statement.

Flannigan is the founder and former chief executive of Service Stream, which provides labour and specialist services to the telco and utilities sectors, since 2004.

Prior to that he was founding chairman of Integrated Maintenance Services and served as general manager of Skilled Engineering for 10 years. A feasibility study on the NBN project is due to be handed down in February.

Comments (0) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Welcome to National Censorship Day
• Conroy calls NBN costings "bizarre maths"
• OptiComm scores Tas NBN deal
• The people's NBN, now with 1001 uses

"I think it was a predictable announcement given the previous reporting that the tests were apparently satisfactory," Lundy told ZDNet.com.au this morning.

The senator, a strong advocate of the free and open use of information technology within government, was reluctant to comment further. "I'm obviously getting a lot of emails on the subject," she said. "My views are well known on this topic."

While in opposition, Lundy was highly critical of the Howard Government's intentions to introduce mandatory internet filtering.

In 2004 she told ZDNet.com.au: "In contrast to the Howard Government, Labor has at least an understanding of the operation of the internet that will ensure our content policies are relevant, useful and meaningful to internet users, not divisive, fear-mongering and irresponsible."

"For example, Labor has always argued that the best approach to internet content management is empowering end users by helping them acquire the skills and confidence for using the net, supervising their children, and installing content and spam filters at the desktop as they see fit," she said.

Lundy helped establish the federally funded Government 2.0 Taskforce, which launched in June. Earlier this month, the taskforce published a draft report recommending that public sector information should wherever possible be free, based on open standards, easily discoverable, understandable, machine-readable and freely reusable and that doing so would "reinforce a healthy democracy".

Comments (13) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Do you support a mandatory internet filter?
• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• Pirate Party, Greens battle Conroy's filter
• Industry welcomes filter policy

Moving to a mandatory ISP filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond such material is heavy handed

Google Australia

Google's major concern is that the scope of filtered refused classification content is too wide, citing a recent report by Australian media academics, professors Catharine Lumby, Lelia Green and John Hartley.

The report found that adults may be refused access to material which is legally classifiable under Australian law. Potentially blocked material could include videos of political assassinations, graffiti art tutorials and drug use.

"Moving to a mandatory ISP filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond such material is heavy handed and can raise genuine questions about restrictions on access to information," Google wrote in the statement.

Google stated that whilst limits should be placed on extreme material such as child pornography, the company has a bias in favour of people's right to free expression.

"While we recognise that protecting the free exchange of ideas and information cannot be without some limits, we believe that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual," posted Google.

ZDNet.com.au asked the head of Google's Policy Team, Iarla Flynn, if the ISP filter will affect the company.

"It's hard to say because the details of how this will actually work have not fully emerged," said Flynn. "We think there could be an impact, and if you're asking if there's material today which could be refused classification material ... the answer to that is yes."

Google also called for more debate and awareness of the filter issue in its post.

"Exposing politically controversial topics for public debate is vital for democracy. Homosexuality was a crime in Australia until 1976 in ACT, NSW in 1984 and 1997 in Tasmania," wrote Google, "Political and social norms change over time and benefit from intense public scrutiny and debate. The openness of the internet makes this all the more possible and should be protected."

Comments (3) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• EFA: Filtering 'damages Australia's reputation'
• Google wins Monash Uni email
• AAPT adopts Google Apps

David Crafti
(Credit: Pirate Party)

The planned filter would see internet service providers (ISPs) block access to a blacklist of refused classification sites. Conroy yesterday released a report which said that blocking such sites would not significantly reduce internet speeds, but also acknowledged that the filter could be easily circumvented and that attempts to prevent that circumvention would cause speed loss.

The Pirate Party believed that the filter was censorship which could end in government manipulation. "Granting the government powers to censor information on the promise that it is for the best of intentions is like leaving a loaded gun in a room full of good people for their protection, but leaving the doors wide open for people to come and go." Pirate Party President David Crafti said in a statement.

Even if Conroy only had Australia's best interests at heart, he couldn't promise that successive governments would, he said.

"This is clearly the first step down a slippery slope that starts with a good, if misguided, intent of blocking child pornography and quickly spreads to blocking information based on morality (R18+ games, legal pornography, pro-euthanasia and anti-abortion sites) and eventually some government comes along and quietly stops anyone with opposing views from voicing them," Crafti said.

The 100 per cent filter rate experienced in the report was only for a very low number of sites, only a fraction of what the government considered illegal, the party said. "The feasibility that this trial established was purely from a limited, technical standpoint," the party said.

The Pirate Party thought that child pornography should be prevented via online policing organisations stopping people from producing it. Parents should opt-in to filters if they were concerned.

This is clearly the first step down a slippery slope that starts with a good, if misguided, intent of blocking child pornography and quickly spreads to blocking information based on morality

Pirate Party President David Crafti

The party said that implementing the policy would put the Australian Government in breach of Article 19 of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. "This article states that 'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers'," the party said. "As Australia has ratified this declaration, it should adhere to the principles, even if not implemented explicitly in law."

Any censorship was too much censorship, the party said.

The Greens were also concerned by the decision to introduce legislation to make filtering mandatory. "The pointless nature of this proposal is set out in the report itself, which admits that the filters will be circumvented by people seeking blocked material," Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said today.

He was also worried by the government's acknowledgement that it would import blacklists from overseas to supplement the Australian filter. "As many people have said, this is the thin end of the wedge. The policy is simply misguided," he said. He encouraged the public to "communicate the full range of their concerns to the government rather than being deterred by what looks like a done deal".

The Greens would be mobilising to force "significant amendments" if the legislation made it to the Senate, he said.

The resistance by these two parties has not been matched by Shadow Communications Minister Tony Smith, who only said that he was sceptical of the filter's workability and that he would be looking closely into the details of the report. Internet service providers have also not raised an outcry. Telstra, Primus and Optus have all put forward their support for the government's scheme.

Comments (5) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Industry welcomes filter policy
• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• Telstra supports Conroy's filter
• EFA: Filtering 'damages Australia's reputation'

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy announced a plan yesterday to introduce mandatory internet filtering legislation in the middle of year. Industry has welcomed the policy and Twitter has exploded in fury, but what do you think?

Answer our poll and let us know exactly what you think about this policy in the talkback below.

Comments (34) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• Industry welcomes filter policy
• Welcome to National Censorship Day
• Telstra supports Conroy's filter

A damaged cable under Melbourne airport brought down the airline's telecommunications service provider, crippling its passenger check-in process from lunchtime on Tuesday and forcing the cancellation of 48 flights.

"Telstra rectified the problem at 10.30pm (AEDT) last night so we can access our systems and that's all back on track," Virgin Blue spokeswoman Amanda Bolger told AAP today. "We anticipate some delays today with the flow-on impact of the flights that were cancelled."

More flights were cancelled on Wednesday with pilots and crew members also left stranded overnight and unable to get to cities they were supposed to fly out of. Hundreds of passengers had to be provided with accommodation overnight and thousands of meal vouchers were provided, Ms Bolger said.

"We have flown in extra staff and had others doing double shifts," she said. "We will get back on track as quickly as possible but are dealing with a huge number of passengers."

Passengers had to be checked in and boarded manually on Tuesday, creating a massive delay and a huge backlog. All domestic destinations were affected but trips to Sydney were worst hit.

Comments (2) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Power outage downs Qld govt services
• Defence bigwigs get IT minder
• Telecom NZ suffers XT outage
• 7 more agencies seek interim datacentres

They're the government. They regulate the industry. Internode will do what it's told

John Lindsay, Internode carrier relations manager

The first ISP to tender its response to the filtering was Primus, which had been a part of the trial. It said the blocking of refused classification content had its "full support", with the right checks in place.

"Primus Telecom believes that the introduction of an ISP filtering regime into Australia requires a balance between protecting Australians' rights of free expression and access to information with the need to improve online safety and the need to take action against the providers of objectionable content," said Primus CEO Ravi Bhatia.

Telstra was also behind the government's move, as well as unsurprisingly Family First Senator Steven Fielding.

"I believe there needs to be some sort of filtering on the internet the same way every other medium has some level of protection," he said in a statement. "We all know there is some pretty awful stuff on the web and we need to make sure this doesn't make its way into our homes."

However, Fielding was also cautious about what internet filtering could mean, saying that the impact on speeds had to be taken into consideration as well as Australia's right to free speech. "There's a fine line sometimes between filtering and censorship and it's important we get this balance right."

Shadow Minister Tony Smith, was not as vehemently against the proposal as many would have expected. Smith said that he needed to assess the trial results, preferably via an independent audit. He intended to consult with Telstra and other ISPs on filtering over the next few weeks.

He did point out, however, that ISPs had said in the past that the solution was technically difficult. "The fact that it has taken two years in office for Minister Conroy to make today's announcement is testament to the difficulty he has had with the workability and effectiveness of his proposal and evidence of his chaotic approach to the issue," his office said in a statement.

The Internet Industry Association and the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association both intended to review the report and announcement before considering responses and talking about technical ramifications.

Internode said only that it had its hands tied. "They're the government. They regulate the industry. Internode will do what it's told," John Lindsay, Internode carrier relations manager told ZDNet.com.au.

Speaking personally, not in his capacity for the company, Lindsay said he thought the government's move was the equivalent of sending an apprentice to find a left-handed hammer.

"It's taken an entire year to come up with a way to say we ran a trial and it didn't suck too much," he said. "The concept of the internet changes faster than bureaucrats can keep up."

He didn't believe that the government would pass legislation quickly, especially given its track record on passing the legislation for the separation of Telstra.

The only party which as yet officially responded to ZDNet.com.au's queries with heightened concern was Electronic Frontiers Australia.

"Given the pilot's modest goals, it was designed from the beginning to pass. Although it may address some technical issues, what it leaves out is far more important — exactly what will be blocked, who will decide, and why is it being attempted in the first place?" EFA spokesperson Colin Jacobs said in a statement.

Other ISPs including Optus, Exetel, Eftel, TPG Telecoms (formerly SP Telemedia), Adam Internet, Netspace and iiNet have yet to respond to ZDNet.com.au's queries for comment. Unwired declined to comment.

Comments (9) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Telstra supports Conroy's filter
• EFA: Filtering 'damages Australia's reputation'
• Mandatory ISP filter due mid-2011
• Enex: Filtering effective, negligible impact

"Telstra is supportive of a refused classification content blacklist of URLs compiled from the combination of a complaints-based system and known child abuse websites passed on by expert agencies in other jurisdictions," Telstra's group managing director, public policy and communications, David Quilty, said in a statement.

"We support the fact that the government intends to legislate its approach, thereby ensuring that it applies across the industry, is clearly spelt out and is enforceable by law," he said.

Telstra welcomed Conroy's consultation with ISPs on the matter and his intent to carry out further consultation. "Continued industry collaboration will promote online safety through practical and efficient implementation of the government's strategy," Quilty said.

Telstra believed that blocking of URLs on a blacklist was feasible and practical to implement, without a significant impact on network performance, as long as it was limited to a defined number of URLs.

It had conducted its own blacklist filtering trial in April 2009 using a test environment and 10,000 random URLs (unlike the ACMA list used by government trials). However, the trial noted that it was possible for the filter to fail when applied to heavily trafficked sites, and didn't trial the system's ability to prevent circumvention, as Telstra felt that tech savvy users would always be able to avoid filters.

Despite approving the legislation to make filtering mandatory, Telstra cautioned the government that it would not be a silver bullet to make the internet safe. "Other factors critical to internet safety include user-based PC filtering, the creation of safer learning and social networking environments, appropriate supervision and involvement by parents and teachers, education, law enforcement and international cooperation," Quilty said.

Comments (8) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Conroy to talk filter today
• Enex: Filtering effective, negligible impact
• Conroy promises filter report in "due course"
• When will Conroy release filter report?

It damages Australia's reputation as a free and open democracy and as a technologically advanced and savvy 21st century country

EFA vice president Colin Jacobs

"The bigger policy questions haven't been addressed by this report, it's focusing on a minor technical aspect," EFA vice president Colin Jacobs said today.

ZDNet.com.au also asked Jacobs whether the EFA believed that the bulk of public outrage would be over the performance issues raised in the report rather than the civil rights implications of the internet filter.

"Our sense is that people will be much more worried about the fact that the government will have a secret blacklist that is not very compatible with our status as a democracy and a free society," said Jacobs.

In a statement released today, the EFA said it had expected the filter pilot to pass, and that the report left out several questions including what will be blocked, who will decide and the reasons for its implementation.

"So the question is, why is this policy being pursued? Especially considering there are financial costs as well as governance issues around a secret government blacklist that the public obviously doesn't have access to," said Jacobs.

Further concerns for the EFA include the blocking of websites that do not fit into the Australian Communications and Media Authority's classification guidelines, like R18+ computer games and adult material that falls outside of the X and R ratings.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy also made a statement earlier today saying that the government will be consulting the general public to "improve the accountability and transparency of processes that lead to RC (Restricted Content) rated material being placed on the RC Content list."

While the government claims that the filter will protect children, Jacobs believes that it is a waste of money and lacks purpose.

"When you're actually looking down at what this filter will accomplish, it actually accomplishes very little for children," said Jacobs, citing that the filter was primarily targeted at adults and won't protect children from harmful materials.

"I've spoken to people overseas and they're asking: what's going on down there? Are you guys crazy?" said Jacobs. "It damages Australia's reputation as a free and open democracy and as a technologically advanced and savvy 21st century country that understands how the internet works and why a free and open internet is so valuable technologically and democratically."

Jacobs gave an example of a humorous overseas reaction to Conroy's filter referring to the British ISP Association's nomination of Stephen Conroy for the "Internet Villain of the Year" award.

Comments (7) | Email this

Share: Google | Facebook | del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Slashdot | StumbleUpon

• Hackers target govt over filter
• The internet filter is a giant funnel
• Children's, liberties groups protest filter