cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

MrToast
Grafter
Posts: 550
Registered: 31-07-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

I'd like to suggest that Plusnet follow BT's example and block access to sites which are 'Illegal to View' under the terms of the 1978 Child Protection Act.

The motive for doing this is simply as an act of public service to help reduce the crime of abuse. It would also signify that Plusnet are up to date in tackling these issues where possible.

There is no good to be gained by an ISP allowing their systems to be used for such purposes. The work of identifying and maintaining a list of offending sites is done by the internet Watch Foundation (IWF) so that must take account of most of the work involved.

For more see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3908215.stm


Moderators note (John) link corrected for you so that it works.

Regards,

Andrew
27 REPLIES
michaelscott
Grafter
Posts: 594
Registered: 09-08-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

It is not an ISPs place to censor the Internet. Who gets to say which sites are blocked and which are not? Once a handful of sites are censored, it is not long before dozens of sites are censored, then hundreds, then thousands, and then we might as well be living in China.

I do not advocate such sites, it just seems to me that the best solution is to prosecute those who regularly visit them and to give them the psychological help they need.
N/A

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Yes, but which comes at the greater cost.

More than anything, it should come at a choice.

The IWF do some great work, and should be helped and praised more. What they don't do is create sensor lists, which is what many people beleive they do.
MrToast
Grafter
Posts: 550
Registered: 31-07-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Are you defending child abuse in the name of free speech??!!

This is a case of material which is a criminal offence to access in the first place. What busines has anyone including ISP's in facilitating this?

Whilst an ISP or a phone company or a Post Office can't be expected to set out specifically to prevent this traffic where the information is available to identify it why should it not be acted upon?


Regards

Andrew
N/A

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Royal mail have no ways of filtering such material transfer.

On moral gound, ISPs should be doing more yet, but in legal terms, it is there choice.

On your terms, PC Makers should be fitting hardware filters into every PC. Why? Because they are currently facilitating the transfer of such matterial too.
michaelscott
Grafter
Posts: 594
Registered: 09-08-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Quote
Are you defending child abuse in the name of free speech??!!

Quote
I do not advocate such sites


:roll:
Alecto
Grafter
Posts: 2,886
Registered: 30-07-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

The case for blocking child-pornography sites seems clear, but what if Blair's lot passed a law against criticising the Labour government and declared satirical websites illegal? Would you still agree with blocking those? After all, they would be no more or less illegal than the porn sites, and who are we to decide which laws to obey and which to flout?

It's the thin end of the wedge, and before long the ISPs would be inundated with so many things to block that all we'd be able to access is Tony Blair's official weblog.

And in any case, I'd have thought that those who run such sites could move, rename or otherwise disguise their wares to circumvent any such block and keep ahead of the ISPs. And it would be typical of the government - of whatever colour - to put an impossible task on someone just so they could claim a crackdown, victory or other election-winning coup.

So the ISPs would be heavily fined and some would go out of business; the government would claim to be tough on porn, tough on the causes of porn and get re-elected; and the pornographers would carry on as before.

How I wish the world were a simple place.
N/A

Re: Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Quote

For more see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3908215.stm


Oh dear I had better remove the photos of the family enjoying themselfs at our loca zoo from our website,as there are images of our children on them, and as Home Office minister Paul Goggins has stated "Every image of a child that appears on the internet is an image of a child that's abused.".

Is it just me.and although I do not condone sexual images involving children I am wondering if paranoia has gone into overdrive here,or do government ministers genuinely believe that the internet is nothing but porn.

What did they need child protections laws for in 1978 because a lot of people will tell you that child abuse did not excist before the internet became freely available to everyone <tongue in cheek>

But whichever way you look at the sexual abuse of children has been going on for centuries,and blocking a few websites is not going to make any difference,and the pedophiles that have been caught have not been caught because they have put up websites.

I suppose the other factor to consider is that what maybe illigal here may not be illegal elsewhere in the world and after all the internet is a global thing,and there are still cultures that quite happily marry off their 11 and 12 year old daughters to men twice there age without any qualms at all.

The picture that ministers etc would seem to have you believe is that every second person is a potential child molester,in which case why are parents letting 8-10 year olds wander the streets of my town at 10-11 o'clock and night a situation that I would have thought would have brought the molesters out of the woodwork but it does'nt lots of complaints to police about the noise,but perverts seem to in short supply,and it is a sorry state of affairs that upstanding organisations like "St John Ambulance" are being taught not to give a distressed child a cuddle as it may be construed as abuse,and if the child comes toward you for help or assurance..... to back away.

I suppose when it boils down to it every decade has to have it's crusade be it the "reds under the beds" of the 50's everyone taking LSD in the 60's and child abuse is this decades,with the difference that now you get "yes m'lud I am a serial killer but I was abused as a child so should be allowed to get away with it because it's not really my fault"

Just my 2 bobs worth

IanJ

[Moderators note (by Thomas): Duplicate removed for you.]
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Hi,

This thread brings together two subjects feel very strongly about, namely child pornography and censorship.
I would say feel free debate either or both issues, what I will do is raise the specific idea of using BT's techniques and software of blocking the sites listed by the IWF. This has had quite a lot of press attention in the last 24 hours and there was even a question to Tony Blair in PMQ's this afternoon.
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Raised as idea 2745.
glyndev
Grafter
Posts: 620
Registered: 31-07-2007

Re: Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Quote
why are parents letting 8-10 year olds wander the streets of my town at 10-11 o'clock and night


I work as a night cashier at a filling station in Barnsley and regularly see kids of this age at 2,3,4am buying sweets. This in an area of Barnsley that is full of bedsits and flats that are occupied by ex-cons and druggies.

These perverts, if it was up to me they would be made incapable of any further abuse, and without the aid of an anasthetic.

As for banning access to these sites, It would not stop them gaining access. I think also that this has the potential to degrade the service for every internet user in that (I may be wrong in my thinking if so someone correct me) The banning would take the form every URL entered by every user would have to be checked against the list of banned sites which takes time and all lookup requests would have to be queued, more delays for the user.

This would only force the pedophiles further underground and there are always ways around this banning.

A more pro-active way of combatting pedophiles is to lolog all URL's visited by a user then check the log against the banned list as a background process. If any instances of a banned site are found then they are flagged, brought to the notice of the ISP staff who pass the relevent information to the authorities.
N/A

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

[Suggesting that ANYTHING be blocked is a offensive proposal for any user that values their privacy and freedom, and is darkly ironic considering we have just commemorated the 60th Anniversay of D-Day. Those brave veterans who are still with us will testify to both you and I that freedom is rarely "free", and that sometimes the cost of enjoyment of simple freedoms is appallingly high! ]

But let's not joust with emotive arguments. Apart from being a poor basis for legislation, my key point is that blocking sites really is the "stupidest of the stupid" test for any ISP!

If an ISP filters sites according to banned content, then give it 5 years, and defences will be offerered in court along the lines of "my ISP blocks ilegal sites, they didn't block this one, so I knew it was OK ! "

Do ISPs, does PlusNet, KNOWING the impossible practicalities of PERMANENT compliance, REALLY want to go down this route? I'm not talking here about "best efforts" - I'm talking about a legally defined and ongoing responsibility to block certain sites, with criminal penalties for failure? (...and civil liability for "false positives"?)

Most other ISPs - even including the gullible btopen.... - will not touch it with your bargepole, let alone theirs!

- Mike Hart

PS How about VoIP calls - would you like to be held legally responsible for THEIR content as well, and what about MSN, thats gotta contain at least "one libel (and therefore, offence) per second". ...and email!....hah!

I posted an idea in here 6 weeks ago, and didn't even get a "courtesy reply". Place yourselves in a position where you will be legallally liable for blocking, and a "do nothing" attitude like that will result in far more than a few harsh words from me!

Would all stupid ISPs please take one pace forward!

PPS And all through this intrusion into the communications of law-abidng citizens, traffic passing through the WAN port of vile paedophiles' routers will have been subjected to 1024-bit encryption!
N/A

Re: [Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Quote
I'd like to suggest that Plusnet follow BT's example and block access to sites which are 'Illegal to View' under the terms of the 1978 Child Protection Act.


Please don't! I can give two (good) reasons:

Firstly, because it won't work. The real problem is not the web sites (which are relatively easy to police), but the chat rooms, ftp sites, etc. which are almost impossible to find. By blocking sites we are lulling ourselves into a false sense of security. I would also question the wisdom of forcing the "community" further underground. As with pretty much every illegal activity, the only way to stop the abuse of children is to tackle the demand for child-porn, not try to block the supply. If there demand is there then it will be met somehow. Any attempt to block it will be futile as the supplers will always be one step ahead.

Secondly, there is the "freedom of speech" argument. I am not defending anyone involved in child-porn. However, when you start blocking any site you set a precedent that blocking is acceptable. If its OK to block child-porn sites, is it OK to block sites enciting racist violence? If its OK to block sites enciting racist violence is it OK to block sites enciting anti-government rioting? If its OK to block sites enciting anti-government rioting, is it OK to block general anti-government sites? Once you have a mechanism in place to easily block sites, it is much easier to let free speech slide.

Additionally, using BTs technology you are reliant on the blacklist being provided. Is it being provided by a reliable organisation? Will it continue to be reliable in the future?
jabb0
Grafter
Posts: 716
Registered: 18-09-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

Relying on BT for anything is a mistake.

A proactive approach should be used to dis-courage unacceptable behaviour.

The problem is that ppl have no sense of right or wrong any more, instead its a sense of getting caught or not. If ppl concerned themsleves with being right there would be no worry as to getting caught.

Plus a reactive approach is much like the way windows is built. The longer you use it the more unreliable it becomes - until eventually u have to scratch the lot and start again. Exactly, how useful is this...reallyHuh

how about a proactive approach in which everyone is involved, or everyone is encouraged to be involved. Not to try to catch those who are acting in an unacceptable way (that should be the police that do that, after all why should i loose x% of my salary to public instituations which pass the buck to private companies), but to educate and persuade. 9 times outa 10, u force some one to do something, they will want to do the complete opposite - Its human nature and there is no arguing with that.

Plus if i want to get to a site which has been blocked by my ISP, ill just use another connection - after all i have got 2 anyway, incase i run out of hours on plusnet.

Its a case of plugging a leak in a dam with ur finger, to see that another leak springs open, and it jus outa your reach.

jabb0

PS All of the above relates to everything to do with anything - not just PORN.

Peace Cheesy
glyndev
Grafter
Posts: 620
Registered: 31-07-2007

[Idea 2745] Block 'Illegal to View' Sites

This is starting to remind me of the slippery slope associated with events in the past.

Russia early 1920's and Germany 1930's to name but two.