The ACTA Internet Chapter: Putting Pieces Together
ACTA Guide, Part 1: The Talks To-Date
ACTA Guide, Part 2: The Documents (Official and Leaked)
ACTA Guide, Part 3: Transparency and ACTA Secrecy
Government To Introduce ISP Child Porn Reporting Bill |
| Print | |
|
Monday November 23, 2009
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Multiple reports this morning indicate that the government plans to introduce a new bill requiring ISPs to report child pornography websites to designated authorities. More on the bill when it is released, but the government is apparently treating this as part of the lawful access package. Further, cybertip.ca already provides a tipline service and the largest ISPs already block child pornography images identified on the Cybertip.ca list.
Comments (11)
An unstoppable excuse
said:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An unstoppable excuse to encroach on our freedoms Child porn is a lever which is used to pry away our privacy. Yes, child porn is wrong, but those who made it already committed crimes. The act of creation is alone illegal. What's scary is that child porn is ephemeral and suddenly when you are in possession of this ephemeral illegal information you can go to jail. Have fun proving you didn't know it was there because your PC was being used as a node in a botnet. * Child porn is used to invade our privacy by making digital files as illegal as narcotics. Therefore the govt needs to search computers because it is just as important as searching for narcotics. * It is a bill, meaning it will be law, so they will of course tack on all the privacy invading tools they can. Such as requiring the ISPs to track everything their customers request. * As Dr Geist pointing out we have cybertip.ca already. Now stitch this altogether, you have a picture of an unspeakable act, the act of producing that picture was already illegal. Possession of that picture is illegal. Now the police and the freedom hating Canadian govt want the right to spy on you to ensure that this disgusting picture of a disgusting act is not being sent by you or to you. They'll of course assume that anything destined to you is yours and you had intent to consume it. Essentially we are to be spied upon. Child porn is wrong, disgusting, immoral but don't let it chip away at our other freedoms. It simply isn't as important as the actual children who were harmed and those who harmed them. Wouldn't you rather the producers of child porn be brought to justice instead of you for being foolish and running a tor exit node? |
|
What about CHILDREN?!1111 “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” -Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Publ. Houghton Miflin, 1943, Page 403 |
|
... @An unstoppable... I can't say that I disagree with you on most of your points. I suspect that no small part of this is a case of the police wanting to offload some of their costs. A number of forces already have cybercrime organizations; they will surf the net looking for stuff like this. Offloading detection onto the ISPs save the forces money at a time when many are under budgetary crunches, as they don't need to fund it themselves; they can simply focus on the reported detections and claim the glory for the arrests. Unfortunately there is a tendency for governments of all political stripes to simply create law in response to a public perception of a problem, after all, if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. It is left up to the courts to try to sort out pesky little things like constitutionality, conflicts with Charter Rights and other laws, etc. |
|
... This becomes far scarier when you realize that thanks to a succession of "protect the children" bills passed by panic-stricken governments on the verge of electoral defeat (first the briefly-lived Kim Campbell Conservative government, then Paul Martin's Liberals) Canada has what is probably the broadest legal definition of "child porn" in the developed world. Technically, possessing Vladimir Nabokov's novel Lolita is a crime in Canada. |
|
Bye Bye Privacy This legislation is the golden ticket for our Government to get into our computers. With Canada's ultra-strict definition of CP, they can pretty much get into any computer they want. Have the film Pretty Baby? You're toast. Anime fan? You're toast. Researching Lolita for a school project? You're toast. 120 Days of Sodom? You're toast. Like Lolita fashion (which has nothing to do with CP)? You're toast. Like J-music groups like Hello! Project? You're toast. Click the wrong link? You're definitely toast. Step carefully online...one click and you're a shameful disgusting child predator criminal for life. You have no defence because if it is on your computer that means the courts assume you must have intentionally obtained it. The worst part about it is that as soon as you mention its an anti-CP bill people just jump onboard with their support without looking at what the implications are. If you even attempt to protest the bill, you will be the first the authorities will test it on out of "concern" WHEN it passes. Kiss what little hint of privacy we have good-bye folks! |
|
Same old tricks keep working The politicians keep using the same playbook over and over and the people keep falling for it over and over. Can I ask why? Are we really that dense? Is it diffusion of responsibility at work? |
|
Hey Namee... .... seems your quote you found in Mein Kampf is totally banned from the CBC forums. Seems they have no use for user-generated truth. (they even removed my posts with quotes from their own stories!) |
|
Gregg: I'm not familiar with the commenting system on cbc.ca. Do the mods give any reason for deletions? Are there any clearly set posting guidelines on the website? Did you keep copies of what you posted? Did you take this up with their ombudsman or whatever? BTW I prefer the term "citizen-generated truth" :P |
|
Might be the fact of the source of the quote... ...that CBC objects to. Or they may see it as a premature invocation of Godwin's Law. |
|
@ Same "Do the mods give any reason for deletions?" Nope. "Are there any clearly set posting guidelines on the website?" Yes and it was within them. "Did you keep copies of what you posted?" A lot of it. (not one-liners) "Did you take this up with their ombudsman or whatever?" Yes and while they said it's not in the scope of their mandate (or anyone's, the mods are rather autonomous), they did forward the complaint with reccommendation, because mine sure hasn't been the first! @ Dwight Williams: "Might be the fact of the source of the quote... ...that CBC objects to. Or they may see it as a premature invocation of Godwin's Law." Truth is truth and they have no objection posting other people's comments, some downright borderlining on uttering threats. And only right wing kookpots belive in "Godwin's Law", so I avoid CTV and Global ;-) |
|
They finally let it go through! After 14 tries on various threads relating to the topic, they finally posted the Mein Kampf quote! |
Subscribe to this comment's feed