Canada and kiddie porn
p2pnet.net news view:- Yesterday Canada’s largest ISPs, including Bell, Bell Aliant, MTS Allstream, Rogers, Shaw, SaskTel, Telus, and Videotron, announced the launch of Project Cleanfeed Canada in partnership with cybertip.ca. The project will allow the ISPs to block access to hundreds of child pornography sites. The list of sites will be generated by cybertip.ca.
Project Cleanfeed, which follows a UK model, is likely to generate several responses, notably concerns about censorship and fears that this could extend to other forms of content. While some skepticism is understandable, it should be noted that cybertip.ca will implement an appeal process for content providers who believe that their content is wrongly blocked (though the list of blocked sites will not be publicly disclosed since it would provide a child pornography directory).
More importantly, while some may suggest that this opens the door to other blocking – hate content, defamatory content or copyright infringement to name three – there is a crucial difference with child pornography that should prevent a similar approach. While those forms of content may raise legal issues, in the case of child pornography, it is illegal to even access the content.
That is a crucial difference since under current law there are no valid free speech arguments for either disseminating child pornography nor for seeking the right to access it.
Given that difference, the right of appeal, and the active involvement of cybertip.ca, the arrival of Project Cleanfeed in Canada looks like a good news story that merits close monitoring.
Michael Geist
[Geist is the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He can be reached by email at mgeist[at]uottawa.ca and is on-line at www.michaelgeist.ca.]
Meanwhile, ” ‘Project Cleanfeed Canada’, has a nice Orwellian ring to it don’t you think?” – posts a p2pnet reader, continuing:
This is how it always starts. After all, anyone against this censorship plan will be labeled a child-porn lover by the drooling masses.
It should also be noted that nobody involved in the plan actually expects this plan to work, since there are millions of child-porn sites and they are changing all the time. And on top of that, the majority of child-porn is passed around via mailing lists, usenet, and other various means.
Now that the big ISPs have shown their willingness to block sites, don’t be surprised when it goes past child-porn. Next it will be trial publication bans, then ‘hate speech’, then de-tax sites (those are already being targeted behind closed doors), video/music download sites, then anything that someone in a high place doesn’t want to be seen …
Also See:
Cleanfeed Canada – Canada targets online kiddie porn, November 24, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
November 25th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
If you think this will stop at child-porn, you are sadly mistaken.
You state that ‘it is even illegal to access’ child-porn, as if that is the only type of content that is illegal to access online. Well, I think major software vendors such as MS and friends might have a different opinion when it comes to people downloading (’stealing’) software worth thousands of dollars.
Another thing, have you even researched the actual methods that will be used for this censorship? Will we be blocking just specific URLs, domains/subdomains, or full IP address, or even full IP subnets? You have no clue what the implications of this will be… but you’ll take the risk for what? A shot in the dark against child-porn that is unlikely to be effective by ANYONES standard, even those who are involved in this program?
It is TRIVIAL to circumvent any blocking by using one of dozens of web-based anonymizing proxies such as anonymouse, so how are we going to combat that? Block out all anonymizing services? Yeah, that would be fair. How about web sites that distribute P2P software? There’s always going to be objectionable content on P2P networks, often more so than on the web, should we therefore block web sites that distribute P2P software?
This ‘Project Cleanfeed’ is an ineffective joke of an idea that clearly is aimed at putting the thin end of the wedge into our liberties under the guise of protecting children. Talk about exploitation….
November 25th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
I’ve never believed in legislating morality works. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe there is a place in this world for child porn. I’ve no instant answer on what would cure that.
But neither does throwing out the baby with the bathwater work either. This Mom, apple pie, and save the children is but another cry from those that in most cases would have you live as they want you to, not as they do. Time and again, it shows up that those guarding the doors to access are some of the very ones you don’t want playing guard at all. They seem to gather into the area, those with interests other than the proclaimed and stated mission objectives. What I mean is the very ones that shouldn’t be around children most often are the ones saying what site belongs or doesn’t belong.
Nor does it end there as the previous poster has made comment on. There are so many ways around these blocks as to make it all but futile to those that really want access to such material. Average Joe cares not about the blocking of child porn; he’s not interested. But it always starts here and then another and another is floated forward to be a subject to be blocked. After that those with self-interest involved (such as the content industries) will manage to attach to it their interests. In order to prevent them from having their way, most often it is to throw out the whole business of blocking and you get right back to who is against the children when it is anything but that when it reaches that stage.
As I said before I have no answers. There are some sick people in the world. This has always been with us in some manner and form. I was never abused as a child. I don’t think any child should have to grow up with that in their formative years. I only caution to be careful of what you wish for and give your approval to. These have a way of escaping out into the public as the most draconian of laws that could be imagined and it seems to always start with the best of intentions before growing into a monster that no one would recognize as having started as good intentioned.
November 26th, 2006 at 8:10 am
A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.
The destruction of the rights of the people must begin with the destruction of the rights of the most hated of those people, such that destroying their rights seems acceptable. The process is a slow one, but sure enough, look at where we are today.
Two hundred years ago, there was no such thing as “police.” It was a citizen of the United States of America’s duty as a citizen to stop criminals and drag them to the local sheriff. Gun control? Bullshit. Didn’t exist. Why? Because there is a second amendment, as well as a fundamentally understood right to protect one’s own self from harm.
As we continue to accept limits on our freedom, such as gun control and Internet filtration of the most universally hate-able content, we will also continue to move towards the society in the famous book “1984″ by George Orwell.
Do you *really* think the second amendment means that the people only have the right to bear arms if they’re in a militia, for example…?
November 26th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
What gives these guys at cybertip the right to say what can and can not be accessed on the internet? Who are these ppl anyway?
What about adult porn sites where the models *may look* underage? Can’t allow those. What about gay sites with young men? They gotta go too I guess…
Who gets to decide and on what basis?
November 27th, 2006 at 1:15 am
Pedo meisters use proxies so filters dont work.
December 7th, 2006 at 1:42 am
Why can’t we do something like this in the US? Kudos to the smart and caring people who initiated the effort!