Feeds

back to article Germany pushes IWF-style child abuse blocklist

The German government has proposed regulations that will oblige local ISPs to apply a government-mandated block list. The proposal, from the Ministry for Families, is designed to prevent access to child pornography. Federal Family Minister Ursula von der Leyen told a conference in Berlin that a "binding agreement" with major …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

Has any quantified success?

I wonder the whole point of banning images was to REDUCE kiddie rape presumably? So has it worked? or are we just playing at rule making again?

Seems to me we're heading in the wrong direction and people are just hoping if we go far enough down this road we'll come to a bend...

0
0
Stop

At first, I was torn..

...between thinking that such a system should at least operate in some way that is democratically accountable, versus the problem of giving such power into the hands of the government.

Then I realised that this dilemma is exactly why I don't believe that such systems should be built in the first place. Bollocks to censorship. You don't build prison walls around all your citizens just because some of them might some day do something wrong. You can only punish people for real crimes, not hypothetical ones.

0
0
Black Helicopters

Dare I say !

Nah we're all in the EU these days. Now time to go and watch Faulty Towers - you know the episode :)

0
0
Coat

Don't mention the war

***BLACKLISTED***

0
0
Happy

state sponsored censorship

They're going to get their list from the Aussies.

0
0
Alert

This is how it begins...

Now, watch as other EU nations join in (if they haven't alread) with their own state-mandated 'block lists'. This is how it begins. The war on child porn. Who will argue? So it happens. And slowly the remit widens. And widens.

This is how it begins. Good night and good luck.

0
0
Stop

Clearly Definable?

But the IWF's fuck up with Wikipedia and now this mess with the IA suggests that it isn't clearly definable. When sites are blocked because something is "potentially in breach" and when challenged the IWF back down and there is no apparent challenge in the courts of the image then the issue as to what actually constitutes child pornography gets brushed under the carpet (Is any image of a child which a paedophile finds arousing pornographic?).

As all these lists are "secret" we have no idea if they really are just blocking child pornography as they claim....

0
0
Stop

Die Ursula muss zurück in die Wuthöhle

Geez, no! Kiddy porn is illegal in this country, period. It is a vile, vile thing and people who engage in its production and distribution need to be prosecuted, and they are. Nevertheless, blocking the web is government induced censorship and we cannot have that. I do not need my government to tell a company I pay for being able to look at the internet what I am allowed to see. This is not China, remember?

0
0
Dead Vulture

Yeah, right

"IWF is independent of government"

Yeah, right.

"and its list is applied on a voluntary basis by UK ISPs"

Yeah, right.

0
0

I hate this crap.

Where do you draw the line? What about breastfeeding mothers, underage fashion models in sexy poses, how old is that girl in the Japanese cartoon, novels with underage characters ...

And its always setup so its zero penalty for censoring the wrong material, so it is guaranteed to become censor first then ask questions latter.

Once the infrastructure is in place it will be misused either accidentally or intentionally.

--

My vote is less censorship and more law enforcement. Keep the sites running, infiltrate them, real crimes ... real cops ... real warrants ... real evidence .. real jail time.

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge
Thumb Down

"mission creep..."

> The minister rejected arguments that future censorship concerns are any reason to avoid applying a system to control access to content universally regarded as repugnant. "Child pornography is a problem issue and clearly identifiable,"

Yes, and nobody's arguing with that. But the point is that once you start establishing the principle that a "problem" issue can be blocked by Governmental fiat it is not at all difficult to find other "problem issues" that also "need" to be blocked.

0
0
Thumb Up

@ David Wilkinson

Exactly. With that approach, law-abiding USERS draw the line by reporting illegal activity to the authorities who can then prosecute, just like in the offline world. They do not have lines drawn for them by an authority they cannot check on — as I would expect the gov to find a way to get around the laws concerning freedom of information, via some homeland security scheme. That would make sense IIGTR, otherwise there would be lists of blocked sites available to the public, which defies the logic of having them blocked in the first place.

0
0

Time to ban Wikipaedia again

It's full of paedophilia. King John married Isabella of Angoulême when she was 13! His daughter Joan married Llewelyn Fawr when she was 14 or 15.

We cannot have such depravity being distributed even if it is historically correct.

0
0

Hmm....

"Child pornography is a problem issue and clearly identifiable".

That's not true. Most laypeople believe that "child pornography" automatically refers to pictures of children being molested, when in fact many countries also prohibit any material which involves children in sexual poses or in a state of simple nudity.

Something which is not clearly defined is not "clearly identifiable".

0
0
Bronze badge

@Brian Ribbon

And Vice Versa. Many people seem to think a nude picture of a minor is automatically child porn, even if the law says different.

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Paris Hilton

@ Andrew Crystall

What you're saying is true, but should we in our locale suffer from censorship because other countries cannot get their act together?

0
0
Black Helicopters

UK has highest rate of underage pregnancies

So to stop this - and also prevent the criminal offence known as 'Statutory Rape' - surely the idiots in charge should be encouraging us to play on our computers rather than blanket-banning anything even remotely "adult" in nature?

Instead ZaNew Labour think it better to criminalise any consenting ADULTS than to actually stick to their original Manifesto pledge from the first time they got re-elected - to get tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.

Last time I checked, schoolboys getting schoolgirls pregnant was not the same as BDSM. Obviously what little I remember from Biology and Sociology when I was at school & college is wrong, since I didn't think that stopping me (potentially) looking at hardcore porn online would prevent girls getting up the duff and women getting attacked.

I am so glad I have Wacky Jaqui and her jackbooted (oops, mustn't say that - some people get off on jackboots!) thugs to keep me nice and safe in their little cotton wool world while their Chancellor throws all the remaining money in the UK into the bottonmless coffers of the banks...

ps mentioning jackbooted thugs was in no way intended as a slur on our own dear Moderatrix, please forgive me grovel grovel.

Black helicopters? Obvious, iinit - Big Brother /IS/ Watching YOU.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.