Moin moin!
Short Intermediate layer: Who is against censorship on the Internet can attach themselves to the website of the German Parliament in a petition:
Petition: Internet - No indexing and blocking of Internet sites of 22.04.2009
Addendum:
Maybe it provide something Knapp only the links inside. As such, I consider myself in political matters out why nbin because I may not be as skilled;)
Why should we be at all against a strong set to do but actually has a meaningful purpose? The spins? How can you be against an anti-child porn set?
The answer is simple: The bill as such shoots WELL past the target.
- What is it exactly in the draft?
summary: The BKA Creates a CRL:
| As part of his duties as a head office in accordance with § 2 of the Federal Law states that the Federal list of fully qualified domain names, Internet protocol addresses and destination addresses of Telemedia services, child pornography under § 184b of the Penal Code contain or the purpose of is to to such Telemedia offers for point (CRL). |
This is given to the provider which will further have to ensure the more difficult access to the pages:
| For the blocking may not fully qualified domain names, Internet protocol addresses and destination addresses are used by Telemedia offers. Blocking made at least at the level of the fully qualified domain name, the resolution remains in under the associated Internet Protocol addresses. The service providers have to adopt the measures immediately or at least within six hours has after the Federal Criminal Police Office set the date revocation list available . |
Versändlicherweise will make no one "advertising" for blocked addresses:
| Service providers have the blocking list, appropriate measures against possibility of third parties who are not involved in the implementation of the closure to . |
also logging each access to the providers so-called "stop hand" - This data should be sent to the BKA and the purpose of prosecution.
| Service providers manage user requests by the target in the restricted list, Telemedia offers are available, on a run of them Telemedia End (stop signal) to the users about the reasons for the Blocking, one contact information to the BKA. The design determines the BKA. (5) The service provider may, on the need for the measures referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4, collect and use personal data. This data may for the investigation of crimes are sent to the order pursuant to § 184b of the Penal Code the relevant authorities. |
That sounds pretty good first? And it would be well for each of the relevant material studied to do that he ends up behind grids ... But we look in detail at times but what exactly does this really mean:
- Blocking of websites, without judicial review, without prior decision: In theory, any web site that someone surfs to land abruptly on a blacklist. It is sufficient if a "rudimentary justification" is here: For example, because they link the website from a friend who has linked the site from a friend that an advertisement has on his website that points to a website somewhere link back. .. Unrealisitisch? This year happened to . Am I now a criminal because I am here to link to a news article that links to a page? Or perhaps directly on Wikileaks?
Nagut: to states:
| The Federal is required to keep records with which the can be proven that the products contained in the blacklist entries for filled time of their evaluation by the Federal Criminal Police Office the conditions of paragraph 1. It ISPs issued under this Act, the show a legitimate interest, in reply to questions about whether and to what mentioned period a Teleservices offer in the block list is or was. |
trick question: Who decides on what is blocked again and Who decides what a "Legitimate interests" is? and who gives you information? only to the provider? That is the reverse: If I locked my domain does not have an idea why I can not find it out.
Not to mention it in other countries already problems came
But what happens now when I actually viewed such a page? For example because it is open on a website a pop or someone "as a joke" a "short link" sends the not containing what it promises? I then right at the neck, the BKA, ne house search and am now criminals? I must then prove that I have NOT searched for banned sites? (Keyword: reversal of Burden of proof) - is actually not in Germany, the presumption of innocence ...
- The causes are not tackled: No child will be less suffering just because the perpetrator rather than the stuff on the Internet send them as CD. The servers hosting illegal content remain online, the "business" of such people are shifting only. Especially since few illegal things are traded on websites - or has schonmal any of you (be it movies, computer games, programs, or other illegal content) an illegal product seen on a website normally accessible? Such matters are to illegal means, such as anonymous FTP servers, peer-to-peer networks or simply exchanged by mail. The only effective way to fight such a thing is, arrest the perpetrators, the source if instead of just a "worse than useless" want to bolt it. The government-required barrier measures are reasonably curious PC users a joke, for offenders or less: "buying a DVD with me and I'll explain how you in the future such immediately suspend"
- A censor is contrary to the Constitution and freedom of information :
Basic Law Article 5, paragraph 1: "(...) A shall be no censorship. "
The censorship of the media, according to the Basic Law allows anyone in this country
. This is possible only if another without censorship
fundamental right in a disproportionate Size is limited. One could
the integrity of children are among them.
However, this is not guaranteed by the censorship.
also restricts the fundamental right to freedom of information.
- will follow suit others. I zietiere here just a detail from a forum which I would agree with that simple.
Even before this bill was adopted, task already made the first ascent of other sites to use this technologie.
The music industry wants to block the illegal download of songs and watch, or foreign gambling providers should be prohibited, pages with content to computer games with violence, ...
And even if we or the blocking of legal content with right appears, it is also a push to political censorship when it proposes to censor such sites.
The past has taught us that following the first step, the second fast. If all have become accustomed to the fact that such sites are blocked, it is also easy to convince enough citizens that it is right to censor even milder political opinions - or at any time simply different opinions.
humbug? sure? not it?
Yes, at first glance, it sounds great when you do something about Child pornography does. On the other side: If the set with the same content only against "illegal music downloads," it would look exactly, only that most people simply would not schreihen "right way". And one is a State censorship makes it is easy other things "to move to."
we really want to "Chinese relations" here?
0 comments:
Post a Comment