EFA receives a 'Take Down' notice

David Heath
Tuesday, 05 May 2009 17:11

Opinion and Analysis

The objectionable page was not hosted in Australia and absolutely nothing on the EFA discussion piece could be considered objectionable.  The complaint could only be viewed as an interpretation of what a fragment of HTML might mean.

EFA's announcement of the "Final Link-Deletion Notice" noted that "Viewing the potentially R-rated page itself is not in any way illegal, and no system is yet in place to enforce the blocking of such web pages. One may well wonder why a link to a legally viewable page should draw the threat of legal sanction while the content itself remains visible. Because the link was on a web page hosted in Australia, the hosting provider - not EFA ourselves, who have more control over the content - falls under Australian legal jurisdiction and could be so served. What this accomplishes is uncertain."

"With fines of up to $11,000 per day threatened against our hosting provider, we have little choice but to comply with ACMA's directive. However, we are investigating an appeal of the order on the grounds that it stifles a legitimate political discussion on the merits of the Government's internet censorship policies."

Interestingly (and highly amusingly), EFA have attached the full text of the "Final Link-Deletion Notice" to today's article.  Which leaves me wondering, are ACMA contravening their own enabling legislation by nominating the link to which they object?  Especially since the "Final Link-Deletion Notice" MUST be made public in order to defend the link removal.

This is an absurd piece of legislation which must be killed.

#Nocleanfeed