CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘blocking and filtering’ Category

Hürriyet: Websites to continue to be banned in Turkey- transportation minister

Websites will continue to be banned as long as they post content inappropriate for Turkish families, a Turkish minister said Wednesday.

Websites to continue to be banned in Turkey- transportation minister

‘Practices are needed to protect young people and the public at large from harmful material online,’ the Turkish Daily News (TDN) quoted Transportation Minister Binali Yildirim as speaking at the international CeBit Information Technology Summit in Istanbul on Wednesday.

‘Law 5651 sees as appropriate the establishment of precautions against material that might hurt children, youth and families. If these precautions are not enough, then the law sees a Website ban as necessary,’ he said.

Turkey is listed together with Tunisia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Iran and Vietnam, as the ‘black listed’ countries that implement government censorship controls.

Turkey’s internet activity sensitivities relate particularly to terror, respect for religion, the founder of modern Turkey, Ataturk, and pornography, and while similar sensitivities are in place in most countries around the world, clear differences between censorship and freedom of speech are apparent, as control mechanisms are widely implemented as a way of curbing abuse.

Turkey has blocked access to over a thousand Internet sites since 2007.

The purpose of the law was not to actually shut down Websites but was to ‘encourage the appropriate use of the Internet for the betterment of society,’ he added.

‘The spirit and purpose of the law is to make civil society and public administration work together and thus keep the bans to as low a number as possible, bringing precautions to the forefront,’ he was quoted by TDN as saying.

Yildirim said it was necessary for the Internet Security Directorate and the Internet Board to work together very closely in establishing content harmonious with the public good.

He said the use of the Internet was rapidly increasing, as the 4 million users recorded in 2002 had grown to 33 percent of Turks using the Internet today.

‘In six months, every household in Turkey will have access to the Internet; it is up to us to provide them with the education and equipment needed,’ he said.

Post from: TorrentFreak

Court Deems Pirate Bay Block to be Illegal: “

This August The Pirate Bay was ‘censored’ in Italy following a decree from a public prosecutor. The Pirate Bay appealed the block and eventually won the court case. Earlier this week the Court of Bergamo detailed its decision, and ruled that no foreign website can be censored for alleged copyright infringement.

Two months ago, following an order from an Italian prosecutor, ISPs started to prevent their customers from accessing the Pirate Bay. The administrators of the popular BitTorrent tracker were accused of making copyrighted material available on the Internet for commercial purposes.

Of course, the Pirate Bay team didn’t agree, and responded in true Pirate Bay style. ‘We’re quite used to fascist countries not allowing freedom of speech. A lot of smaller nations that have dictators decide to block our site since we can help spread information that could be harmful to the dictators,’ Sunde wrote in a blog entry.

The BitTorrent tracker was not going down without a fight, and later announced that it would appeal the decision in court, which they won. The block was lifted and ISPs could again grant their users access to the most frequently used BitTorrent tracker on the Internet.

The Court of Bergamo decided that this block was unlawful, and earlier this week they explained why. According to the court statement (Italian), no criminal court is allowed to issue an order to ISPs to block traffic to a foreign website, based on alleged copyright infringement. Italian law implements an European Directive, 2000/31 CE, which this means that this ruling should be valid in other European countries as well.

‘Under Italian law, this is possible only for child porn and for unauthorized gambling, but there is no such provision for copyright infringement,’ Pirate Bay’s lawyers Giovanni Battista Gallus and Francesco Micozzi explained to TorrentFreak.

‘We have to make sure that no legislative bill promoting such filtering provisions will be passed in the future. At the European level, many authorities pointed out the need to find a balance between the enforcement of alleged copyright infringements, users’ rights, and privacy issues.’

In hindsight, the block only helped the Pirate Bay to grow even further. The case generated a lot of free promotion, and the number of visitors from Italy increased by 5 percent. Not exactly the outcome IFPI had hoped for.

(Via TorrentFreak.)

Giganews Boosts Aid to Fight Exploitation of Minors: “The Internet can be a tough place for lesser known protocols such as BitTorrent and the newsgroups. They are often times the target of all types of political rhetoric and agendas, and frequently the target of copyright enforcement claims – because after all, the World Wide Web is a sacred place. Lately, the newsgroups came under fire from New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, and were a focal point of his campaign to rid internet of the exploitation of minors.”

His campaign was targeted largely at consumer ISPs such as Cablevision, Comcast, RoadRunner, Sprint, and AT&T. These large companies agreed to work with the attorney general’s office, and by that we mean they, in varying degrees, discontinued their customer’s access to the newsgroups. While the effort to rid the internet of child abuse images is noble, taking a Gatling gun to an entire protocol of the Internet was seen as a bit extreme.

The newsgroups are a historic part of the Internet that predates the World Wide Web by over a dozen years. This medium was initially used in a similar manner as today’s community forums, where people would gather and discuss a wide range of topics. The newsgroups were eventually used to distribute files as well, mostly common nonsense like movies, MP3s, videos, and so on. However, like many protocols of the Internet, the newsgroups were exploited to trade images of child abuse.

Although Cuomo’s campaign has successfully exterminated the newsgroups from many ISPs, the problem still remains. Unfortunately, ISP news servers are typically designed for discussion, not trading files. The result of Cuomo’s actions resulted largely in the inconveniencing of legitimate customers who are looking to talk about their hobbies, computer issues, and so on. It’s unknown if Cuomo succeeded or simply forced his targets onto third party newsgroup providers. But if the latter is true, third party providers aren’t about to make things easy for them.

Giganews, one of the largest newsgroup providers, announced their intentions to increase funding to the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), an organization committed to eradicating child abuse images from the net. Giganews took the attorney general’s words seriously, and conducted a self evaluation on their own server network. The study revealed two interesting points:

“First, by using the New York Attorney General’s information, 99.9997% of Usenet has been found to be free of child sexual abuse images,” the latest blog post on Giganews reads. “It is clear that Usenet is not the haven for child sexual abuse that some have recently attempted to claim. Regardless of the small percentage, Giganews has never and will never turn a blind eye to the problem.”

“Second, the Internet Watch Foundation is the most effective agency fighting the spread of this filth. Unlike any US based organization, the IWF actively monitors suspected and known newsgroups as well as any specific images reported to them by Internet users. After they verify the materials are, in fact, child sexual abuse, they transmit takedown notices to all member Usenet providers.”

Giganews’ move is significant. As the largest provider of the newsgroups, Giganews’ action will likely send the message that just because consumer ISPs may be on the decline, third party providers won’t be home for abusive images.

(Via Slyck.com File-Sharing News And Information.)

Eurasia Daily Monitor: Turkish authorities step up censorship of Internet web sites

By Gareth Jenkins, Friday, October 3, 2008

In the early hours of October 4, 2005, Turkey officially began accession negotiations with the EU. Over the previous four years, in order to secure a date for the opening of negotiations, successive Turkish governments had eased many of the restrictions on freedom of expression in the country. Since October 2005, however, the process has ground to a halt. Indeed, in some areas, it appears to have gone into reverse, particularly in the increasing attempts to censor the Internet.

The Turkish authorities have long sought to block Internet users in Turkey from accessing websites associated with militant groups that espouse violence, such as the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). Over the last 18 months, however, there has been a rapid rise in the censorship of websites, purely because they contain material that expresses values or opinions deemed unsuitable for the Turkish public.

Until May 2007, there was no legal framework in Turkey specifically designed to regulate the content of Internet websites. In practice, the judicial system tended to apply the same laws that were used to regulate traditional media outlets such as newspapers and television channels. On May 4, 2007, however, the Turkish parliament passed Law No. 5651, which was specifically designed to regulate Internet content and prevent websites from being used for crimes such as “encouraging suicide,” “the sexual exploitation of children,” “facilitating the use of narcotics,” “obscenity,” “prostitution,” and “gambling” (Law No. 5651 of May 4, 2007, published in the Official Gazette No. 26530 of May 23, 2007). The law also provided for the prevention of access to websites that violated other Turkish laws, such as anti-terrorism legislation or the law that forbids insulting the memory of the Turkish Republic’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (Law No. 5816 of July 25, 1951, published in the Official Gazette No. 7872 of July 31, 1951). In addition, under Article 24 of the Turkish Civil Code (Turkish Ministry of Justice website, www.adalet.gov.tr), individuals can apply for access to be blocked to a website that they feel is “infringing on their personal rights.”
(more…)

YouTube censors Pat Condell’s latest video | EuropeNews: “YouTube censors Pat Condell’s latest video

October 01 2008

The outspoken English comedian Pat Condell (official web site here) has had his latest video blocked by YouTube. You can watch it here, below the break.

The most urgent message in his video is this: If you live in Britain please sign this petition against the creeping poison of sharia law before October 4th when it closes.”

(more…)

Legal Crackdown Jams Michael Moore’s ‘Slacker Uprising’: “Takedown letters go out after the documentary, distributed online as a free gift to the filmmaker’s fans, shows up on torrent sites.

(Via Wired News.)

Over 1,000 Web sites banned in Turkey since November 2007: “The head of Turkeys Telecommunications Board has stated that 1,112 Web sites have been banned in the country since November 2007 following complaints by individuals over inappropriate content on these sites.”

Speaking to the Anatolia news agency, Telecommunications Board President Tayfun Acarer said a center was established within the Postal and Telecommunications Directorate (PTT) on Nov. 23, 2007, allowing people to report Web sites on which they have complaints. He said people also have the option to report their complaints by email or telephone.

“This center has received a total of 24,598 complaints since its establishment last year. Following these complaints, 1,112 Web sites, 861 automatically and 251 with judicial decisions, were banned.”

Acarer said the number of Internet users in Turkey is close to 30 million and, as is the case with all useful things, the Internet can also be used for dishonorable aims. “The duty of the state is to protect its citizens and warn them against harmful Internet content.”

He noted that Web site bans are necessary to prevent the public from falling victim to sites with criminal or ignoble intent, noting that the Transportation Ministry established a Web site, www.guvenliweb.org.tr to this end.

YouTube clips removed

Acarer said complaints were filed for the removal of 202 video clips on the popular video-sharing site YouTube mainly because they insulted Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic.

It is illegal in Turkey to insult Atatürk, a revered figure whose portrait still hangs in nearly all government offices almost 70 years after his death in 1938.

According to Acarer, 12 Web sites were banned because of prostitution, 51 for insulting Atatürk, 79 for gambling, 415 for exploitation of children and 390 for obscenity.

03 October 2008, Friday: TODAY’S ZAMAN

(Via Today’s Zaman, your gateway to Turkish news: News.)

UK minister looks for delete key on user generated content: “

Burnham lets slip UK.gov real view of the net

The UKCCIS is go, with the aim of making the internet safe for kids. But is this the beginning of the end of the internet as we know it, or just a Minister reaching for the inevitable soundbite to round off a PR triumph?…

“

(Via The Register - Public Sector.)

Phil Qiu: The Chinese authorities have blacklisted certain words on the internet. But you can’t suppress communication: “Phil Qiu: The Chinese authorities have blacklisted certain words on the internet. But you can’t, ultimately, suppress communication”

(Via guardian.co.uk Comment is free.)

Germany Says Rapidshare Must Proactively Monitor Content For Infringement: “Another day, another awful legal ruling about file sharing. This time, coming out of Germany. A German court has told file hosting company Rapid Share that it needs to proactively screen and monitor all content hosted on its site and remove any infringing files. The company already uses a hash method to screen out infringing files its been alerted to and employs six people who monitor for infringement, but the court has said that’s not enough. Specifically, it notes (correctly) that an uploader need only change a file slightly to avoid the hash filter — but then somehow makes the leap to suggesting that this becomes Rapid Share’s liability. It’s yet another case where judges seem to not understand where liability should lie. It should be common sense that liability lies with the user who’s doing the actual infringing, rather than the platform provider — but it seems to get mixed up way too often. Of course, in the grand scheme of things, this will have almost no impact as people will simply migrate to other sites instead.

(Via Techdirt.)