Comments on: One time I wish I wasn’t right http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/ blogging is not a spectator sport Fri, 30 Jul 2010 03:07:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-338582 Duncan Riley Mon, 11 May 2009 06:03:59 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-338582 Intro from The Reg<br>The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.<br><br>However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.<br><br>There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC....that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied. Intro from The Reg
The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.

However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.

There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC….that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied.

]]> By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-338580 Duncan Riley Mon, 11 May 2009 05:59:01 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-338580 apol, and will fix. apol, and will fix.

]]> By: Marty http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-338581 Marty Mon, 11 May 2009 05:34:15 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-338581 Ummm... you might want to re-read the Reg article you link to and read the original article ( <a href="http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-removal-notice/" rel="nofollow">http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-...</a> ) because you've taken the quote out of context.<br><br>The EFA published a link direct to the R rated content.<br><br>The ACMA asked them to remove the direct link.<br><br>The EFA then pondered whether a link-to-a-link would also be disallowed. Ummm… you might want to re-read the Reg article you link to and read the original article ( http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-... ) because you've taken the quote out of context.

The EFA published a link direct to the R rated content.

The ACMA asked them to remove the direct link.

The EFA then pondered whether a link-to-a-link would also be disallowed.

]]> By: Stilgherrian http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-338579 Stilgherrian Mon, 11 May 2009 04:59:36 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-338579 Oopsie. The LInk post you mention quotes Kim Holburn at the top, but it's actually by the redoubtable Irene Grahem, who maintains the superb resource <a href="http://libertus.net" rel="nofollow">Libertus.net</a>. Oopsie. The LInk post you mention quotes Kim Holburn at the top, but it's actually by the redoubtable Irene Grahem, who maintains the superb resource Libertus.net.

]]> By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-337967 Duncan Riley Mon, 11 May 2009 01:03:59 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-337967 Intro from The Reg<br>The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.<br><br>However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.<br><br>There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC....that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied. Intro from The Reg
The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.

However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.

There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC….that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied.

]]> By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-337965 Duncan Riley Mon, 11 May 2009 00:59:01 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-337965 apol, and will fix. apol, and will fix.

]]> By: Marty http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-337966 Marty Mon, 11 May 2009 00:34:15 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-337966 Ummm... you might want to re-read the Reg article you link to and read the original article ( <a href="http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-removal-notice/" rel="nofollow">http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-...</a> ) because you've taken the quote out of context.<br><br>The EFA published a link direct to the R rated content.<br><br>The ACMA asked them to remove the direct link.<br><br>The EFA then pondered whether a link-to-a-link would also be disallowed. Ummm… you might want to re-read the Reg article you link to and read the original article ( http://www.efa.org.au/2009/05/05/efa-gets-link-... ) because you've taken the quote out of context.

The EFA published a link direct to the R rated content.

The ACMA asked them to remove the direct link.

The EFA then pondered whether a link-to-a-link would also be disallowed.

]]> By: Stilgherrian http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-337964 Stilgherrian Sun, 10 May 2009 23:59:36 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-337964 Oopsie. The LInk post you mention quotes Kim Holburn at the top, but it's actually by the redoubtable Irene Grahem, who maintains the superb resource <a href="http://libertus.net" rel="nofollow">Libertus.net</a>. Oopsie. The LInk post you mention quotes Kim Holburn at the top, but it's actually by the redoubtable Irene Grahem, who maintains the superb resource Libertus.net.

]]> By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-324458 Duncan Riley Sun, 10 May 2009 23:03:59 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-324458 Intro from The Reg<br>The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.<br><br>However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.<br><br>There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC....that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied. Intro from The Reg
The Australian Government yesterday broke new records for web censorship by requiring the takedown not just of a page containing harmful content, nor even a page linking to harmful content, but a page linking to a link to allegedly harmful content.

However, reading the EFA I see where they ponder the broader implication.

There's also a side issue here I didn't cover, that is that the page in question actually ended up getting a R classification from the censorship board, not an RC, with ACMA then reinforcing that an R online is the same as RC….that actually confirms something that Conroy has previously denied.

]]> By: Duncan Riley http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/05/11/one-time-i-wish-i-wasnt-right/comment-page-1/#comment-324457 Duncan Riley Sun, 10 May 2009 22:59:01 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1580#comment-324457 apol, and will fix. apol, and will fix.

]]>