Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Submissions for Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Amendment now open
freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80647 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41030

Administrator
ID Verified
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

#282718 7-Mar-2021 21:07
Send private message

Submissions on the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification (Urgent Interim Classification of Publications and Prevention of Online Harm) Amendment Bill are open until the 1st April 2021.




Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies 

 

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

 

Create new topic
SirHumphreyAppleby
2938 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1860


  #2669790 8-Mar-2021 08:31
Send private message

Based on a quick read. Concerning.

 

The bad

 

Does not redefine objectionable, which is a definition I have long been critical of (I used to help run NNTP servers back in the early 2000s). The current definition uses extremely vague language that allows pretty much anything to be classified as objectionable should there be will to do so, e.g. Wicked Campers.

 

Empowers the DIA to implement nationwide blocking of any objectionable content (see the comment relating to vague definitions above).

 

Inspectors can issue take-down notices without a interim or final assessment of the content (see the comment relating to vague definitions above).

 

Inspectors and others enforcing the act are explicitly protected from civil or criminal liability (see the comment relating to vague definitions above).

 

Take-down notices can be challenged, but there may be a cost to doing so (see the comment relating to vague definitions above).

 

The good

 

It appears to exclude constables (who have some authority under the Act to assess material) from issuing take-down notices.

 

Content providers are protected from liability if they remove content. This is important as take-down notices may require them to keep a copy for investigation purposes. This should protect them in the edge case where content is proactively removed prior to receiving a take-down notice.



BlinkyBill
1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1100
Inactive user


  #2669819 8-Mar-2021 09:00
Send private message

What would be an acceptable definition of ‘objectionable’.?

Create new topic








Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Updates »

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.








RSS feeds
Main feed
Forums feed
Copyright
©2002-2026 Geekzone®
Site features
Geekzone BI dashboard
Geekzone Badges
Geekzone Status Page

 

Site Information
Subscribe to Geekzone
Privacy Statement
Forum Usage Guidelines (FUG)
Advertising
Trademark and copyright