BT puts block on child porn sites

[JoFerret]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,1232506,00.html

British Telecom has taken the unprecedented step of blocking all illegal child pornography websites in a crackdown on abuse online. The decision by Britain's largest high-speed internet provider will lead to the first mass censorship of the web attempted in a Western democracy.

The move, previously thought to be at the limits of technical possibilities of the internet and prohibitively expensive, was given the personal backing of BT chairman Sir Christopher Bland at a board meeting last month after intense pressure from children's charities.

Known as Cleanfeed, the project has been developed in consultation with the Home Office and will go live by the end of the month, The Observer can reveal. Other major players in the internet market, such as Energis and Thus, which owns rival Demon Internet, are said to be preparing to block banned sites.

....

The initiative would not have been possible a year ago, but improvements in computer processing speeds means that the company is now able to block websites, offensive pages and even individual images of abuse.

<more>

[Kolesar]

1. There's a name right out of Monty Python: "Sir Christopher Bland"

We had an unspectacular local politician in my hometown who was named "David Dull". That is right up there with Spinal Tap's boss who owned Polymer Records: Sir Eton-Hogg.

[Massacure]

2. In my opinion,

If they can block child pornography, it worries about what else they can block just as easily.

I think that it is better of to society that they leave it unblocked and instead focus on arresting the people responsable.

Perhaps I just don't trust them enough.

[Baltimoreboy]

3. The web is international

How do you arrest the people if they don't even live in your nation?

[saigon68]

4. JOHNNY ASSCRACK DOES IT ALL THE TIME !!!!!

They arrest anyone they want and fly them to NEW YORK for their trial.. OR He arrests them and flies them to GUANTANAMO For NO TRIAL.

[Berserker]

6. They arrested

Tommy Chung for selling bongs on the internet which is a joke but it's about time they do something about Child Pornography. Life sentences would be really great for the scum of the earth bastards that promote that shit. I am against censorship but what alternative do we have for this?

[w4rma]

7. This isn't doing anything to prevent child porn. It's just covering it up.

It'll still be happening. It shouldn't be censored in this way because it prevents folks in that country from locating it and reporting it to the authorities who can report it to the other nation's authorities who can arrest the perpetrator(s).

[Massacure]

5. You hand the evidence over to the nation they do live in

Then they arrest them for you.

Is there something I'm missing about international cooperation?

[Doctor Smith]

8. Probably differing definitions of "child" and "pornography"

from country to country.

[WildClarySage]

9. No,

you know more about it than * does.

[napi21]

10. Child porn is BAD, and perps should be behind bars, but

I agree, this kind of blocking on the net is wrong. If this technology exists, that's great. Use it to isolate the perps and get rid of them. There are lots of seb sites I don't want to see, but if the content is legal, let them alone. I would like to see bolcking other stuff too, but on a tier level perhaps. Similar to cable TV. Sex chanels are available on my digital service, but I have the ability to block them or simply not watch. Hate me if you want, but I feel the same way about the golf chanel, MTV, and Catholic TV, but I don't want them blocked or to prevent others from watching.

I must admit, I'm tired of getting dozens of emails every day telling me how to enlarge my pen*s, where to buy cheap viagra, and cute Russian girls. You see, I'm a female!

[Kinkistyle]

13. We should catch kiddie porn dealers and arrest them but censorship is bad.

WThe authorities definitely should go out and bust up the kiddie porn rings that exist in their jurisdiction, but "blocking" these sites will accomplish nothing. First of all the technology is imperfect. So alot of sites will find ways to slip thru, and alot of perfectly acceptable legal sites (legal porn, sex education sites, unrelated sites etc...) will get blocked by mistake. Second of all, people will find a way to beat the block. The internet is like water, it will find ways to flow around obstacles. China and other countries with censored Internet are perfect examples of this. Third of all, there is the slippery slope argument which we are all familiar with.

[daleo]

11. I worry that this will be the cover for increasing internet censorship

If they can do this to pornography, they can do it to sites like DU, especially under "wartime" conditions.

[dbt]

12. Exactly.

This is just a trial run for the next step: banning wrong forms of expression.

:freak:
dbt