Posts Tagged ‘Internet censorship’

Censorship and People’s Opinion Towards It

Monday, November 14th, 2011
Share
Censorship and People’s Opinion Towards It

Censorship and People’s Opinion Towards It

We see the first half of this year is notoriously known for its strikes in the Middle East, Arab dictators left their positions as far as there were no more patience to suffer from the tyranny. Internet has suffered much from this waves of violation too. We can trace it by shutting down social networks and some Internet services, some Arabians tyrants put much effort in order stay at a power but most of them had little success.

It was made so that in order to organize culturally thrown off nation.

Wael Ghonim is a well-known web activist revered across Egypt, he was greatly involved in to the revolution directed against Mubarak regime.

All the region rise up against the dictators, social networking bound them together as a strong force driving the revolution.

The Internet has changed greatly and profoundly the situation so that this impact is obvious enough.

The second half of this year made some progress in upheaval, most of this are now forming new governments and take some lessons in order to balance the situation entirely and change some democratic visions and principles concerned with particular customs and cultures no matter how scattered they are.

So we see the government did no attempts to influence the movement. Such movements greatly depend on the social media actions of peaceful protesters.

Social networking made everything to gather activists all over the world for unification and active steps.

But many nations did not receive such actions.

China has took many steps to be defensed from Internet searches for example from Twitter-like sites. But there are plenty ways if avoiding Internet censorship.

India too took some steps in order to get the protection against pornography and its effectiveness.

Indian censorship is likely to increase successful steps in Occupy movements, activists in the sphere of computer experts usually fight it back.

America is free of censorship restrictions many users find the e-mails which are not sent in case they include some forbidden links.

All these cases show the essence of censorship itself. It is impossible to block all the information. Even restricted China digital space manage protests, every attempt ends up by embarrassing these censoring.

Yahoo has lost many users, some protests in India has expanded greatly despite of the censorship.

Those who have much power can try everything they want to stop the progress, their actions nevertheless will lead only to discontent or some angry if all these attempts will become effective we may change all we need to be changed.

Share

GB is Against Internet censorship

Thursday, November 3rd, 2011
Share

LONDON, Nov. 3 (UPI) — Governments shouldn’t censor opinions or restrict the flow of information on the Internet in the name of security, British Foreign Secretary William Hague says.

Hague, speaking at the London Conference on Cyberspace, said that while cybersecurity threats loom large for all nations, government censoring what is posted on the Internet isn’t the way to deal with it.

“We reject the view that government suppression of the Internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable,” he said.

Instead, the chief British diplomat outlined a set of seven principles he asserted could used to reach broad international agreements to help fight burgeoning cybercrime and espionage without trampling on freedom of expression or handing too much power to individual governments.

Hague told at a reception for delegates at the two-day conference — in which representatives of 60 countries gathered to discuss cybersecurity – that it’s vital the Internet remain a bastion of free speech, the Financial Times reported.

“It is essential that the debate is as inclusive as possible, everyone has an interest in these issues and no one person or body controls the Internet,” he said.

Among the principles Hague put forward included “the need for governments to act proportionately” and in line with international law.

The foreign minister also called for protection of freedom of expression; respect for privacy and copyright; and for internationally coordinated action against criminals acting online, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Britain’s call for less government censorship of the Internet came only a month after China and Russia, which Britain and the United States accuse of censoring political speech on the Internet, proposed standards in which policing cyberspace would be left to each country.

They had only a small presence at the cyberspace conference after issuing their own visions of Internet governance last month, joined by Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

In a letter sent to the U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the four advocated a cyberspace code of conduct centered on the rights of individual governments to control the dissemination of information that “undermines other countries’ political, economic and social stability, as well as their spiritual and cultural environment,” the Journal reported.

But U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, appearing via teleconference at Tuesday’s event, said that kind of government control over the Internet isn’t necessary or desirable.

“This in our view would lead to a fragmented Internet,” he said.

Internet free speech advocacy groups also put in appearances at the London conference, eager to condemn government clampdowns on cyberspace freedoms, including such moves made by Western governments.

John Kampfner, chief executive of the Index on Censorship group, noted the British government has discussed restrictions on the use of social media in the wake of this year’s London riots.

“It’s very easy to defend this case of black and white human rights against dictatorships around the world, but as soon as our own Western style stability of the state is called into question then freedom of expression is expendable,” Kampfner told attendees, Deutsche-Welle reported.

“There should be one rule for all, including Western governments.”
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2011/11/03/Britain-decries-Internet-censorship/UPI-29061320315960/#ixzz1cfjJPivk

Share

USA Government Has Introduced Anti-piracy Protect IP Bill

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011
Share

Protect IP bill is indeed designed to stop piracy. It has a matching bill in the House. It is tough to top Protect IP, but sometimes it is possible. It contains some provisions chilling innovation. Some provisions tinker with the fundamental fabric of the web. Some corporations acquire power censor. What is best of all is bypassing legal process for doing much more of it. The timing could be more exquisite because numerous protests emerging all around in the US give some complains about the power about the inside political system, big content that is quite literally try to foist its version of the Great Firewall of China. For the present moment US government is setting up a blacklist international websites infringing IP rights. The equivalent of making phone carriers suitable for conversations made on the on-line phones. Upon the government lies the decision of what can be observed on the web and what not.

Then the technical way is to be achieved by tinkering domain name servers. It is the technology that transfers the web address into unique IP address while a server is not stored. Having a DNS that is the heart of the Internet and pulling at this fabric we may have dramatic consequences.

Finally Digital Millennium Act have introduced for a long time ago IP rights with the technology innovation booming in the US, it is being modified to the point of lopsided. If a sight has some infringing content according to the sight holder‘s opinion a takedown notice can be sent and all this content will be removed or information can be contested.

Some payment providers such as PayPal, visa or MasterCard can be required for terminating services to any site after having received a letter alleging that the give website does not answer to some notions of law or act illegally. The funs can be turned off if happens something they do not like. The funds won’t function again if they do not pass through the courts. As a result they won’t get any income.

On the whole America has put much effort into Internet censorship, it is a real message US should broadcast now. But this is not the most troubling aspect of the bill. It is normal for governments to send the rest of the world that it sets up censorship apparatus.

It is a terrible legislation. Congresswoman from Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Silicon Valley recently have described the effect the bill will get: it will broke up with the notion of the Internet entirely.

We see the history is repeating, content proposes the remedy
This is history repeating. Except the remedy big content are proposing this time wouldn’t just stop VCR technology. It would chill free speech, stop innovation, and pull at the fabric of the Internet. In short: they are trying to give America it’s very own version of the Great Firewall of China.

Share

Professionals Strike With Internet Censorship

Monday, October 31st, 2011
Share

Notions of protection of freedom and free expression of emotions all these is a form of on-line media functioning. Among professionals there exist an opinion the professionals and watchdog are becoming under attack. National Audiovisual Media Council that is governmentally founded made a warning for several televisions channels not to show episodes of programs being criticized by some social groups and what’s more religious figures.

A number of politicians declared the council’s warning. It stranded out that it was a simple attack on freedom of expression. The council announced plans for establishing a database of media websites for organizing on-line media. Abdey –Hadi Mahfouz recently called on Lebanese website hosts for registering websites at the council. The applications would start accepting applications on 1st of November. He did not specify all the types of websites requiring registration or technical means used for creating such a database.

Neither the government nor the Parliament agree with new law regulating media, council declared its decisions and recommendations will be followed by all media organizations until a new law will be released. Executive media director Samid Kassir Eyes Foundation is not agree. According to his statements there is nothing legal. There is no possibility to impose regulations on Internet media. The council cannot demand the implementation of law. It is unacceptable for advisory board to disregard new developments in the World Wide Web.

Since 1994 there are much changes in this sphere. All blogs, on-line portals are now major news source for the Leban population. The council has no intention of freedom of expression being damaged. As far as mandate has expired its validity there is no possibility to carry out duties on protecting audiovisual organizations. During last years hundreds of blogs and more than a dozen of on-line portals have been opened. Political parties establish individual information website against opponents online. Mainly such on-line news portal are being supported by some regulations fixed by on-line media. Some media report that government should support its functioning because it a new sector of web life. There are some ethics that must be avoided among them one can find religion, children, sects.

Share

USA and China – Questions and Answers About Internet Censorship

Saturday, October 29th, 2011
Share

Recent events in China has really changed the opinion towards the situation concerning censorship in China. USTR (United States Trade Representative) responsible for commercial matters requested consultations at WTO concerning Internet censorship regime.

It was not just a formal complaint. It is sooner a question set among countries concerning sensitive issue. Overall China’s treatment towards the situation and questions taken into consideration will consider the key to the information freedom in the People’s Republic of China.

On the whole this article is devoted to explanation of the significance of the development in this direction. Two primary questions will be discussed in this material. First aspect is USA and China positions at WTO concerning censorship issues. Second aspect to regarded is explanation possible illegacy of China’s Internet censorship according international law, regarding exact questions posed to the country during the latest consultations. It should be noted the implications of this development can greatly influence domestic politics of the country.

Questions about intellectual property rights case.
A number of consultations hold with China touched upon several aspects of intellectual property laws. Finally WTO declared a formal complaint. The complaint reflected China’s policy in providing no protect of the intellectual property rights failing in censorship laws. If we take into consideration legal products of show business here we may found some singer banned in this particular country, it means further away all the music products coming from his name won’t be protected in this direction in the given country. If a singer holds a copyright country’s authorities won’t enforce the copyright, it means her creative products can be objected to free pirate.

Sound reclamations in the Chinese authorities rounds led to the statement if the work was not allowed in the country so there is no use of protecting it. Talking about American and Chinese treatment of the situation the American side points out a great volume of copyrighted information that does not suit the requirements of Chinese censorship. WTO denied China’s defense and declared it must take intellectual property rights in case the goods do not meet country’s property rights if the goods does not suit fixed requirements.

Audiovisual products in China
One more questions is well worth paying attention to in this argue. After WTO decided the dispute between China and US in the above indicated. Question concerning audiovisual products rose above. According to Chinese law only inner enterprises are allowed to import movies, magazines, books and other similar products which are illegal under international law.

China took the defensive side pointing to another aspect of WTO law. According to the law country can take violate measures towards WTO if there is necessity in protecting the aspects of morality. Such censorship regime required in protecting public morality. China disputed this aspect, urging that monopoly for importing cultural products need to be enforced.

US declared that China has a right to move a model without relying the frames of censorship. Both parties can import the products and apply to the central censorship permission department. China urged this approach is far more costly, china needs to hold the reforms and import the regime of complying international law.

Current consultations
For the present time there are being holded consultations devoted to the disputes. One of the obligations accepted by China after joining to WTO is publishing and making publicly available some foreign jurisprudence translations affecting international law. Foreign business can’t be imagined without a website. Some foreign websites are often blocked in the country. Such giants as Facebook, Twitter or Google are the best examples. The problem is humbling little brick and business companies not well known over the country.

1. Service supplier websites are usually based not in the country and sometimes are inaccessible. It can prevent companies from marketing products to the market. There must be an agreement between two sides in understanding rules and adopting appropriate policies in order to avoid the problems.

Among the main problems to be decided one can find the follows issues:
- Determining ministry responsible for blocking and unblocking websites
- Clearing out what particular criteria influence on getting access to the foreign websites
- What ministers are responsible for drafting?
- What is the process of a blocked website?
- How does the blocking occur considering directly or indirectly.
- are questions of blocking and unblocking are typically implemented by companies by means of the written order in government. What particular organs are organized in such process?
-can a service supplier determine being not in the area what is up with success to the website in order to avoid some misunderstandings.
- can a service supplier be affected by a decision in blocking the website.
- is the process used to preventing in getting access to the websites both foreign and not.

2. United states is interested in better understanding of the functions of the office for foreign business
- What are the responsibilities and authorities of the SIIO?
- Will the SIIO handle licensing or other approval processes for Internet service providers or make decisions regarding filtering of foreign websites? If so, please describe which of these processes the SIIO will manage.
- Should companies contact the SIIO or some other entity when they have questions concerning China’s Internet laws, regulations and policies? If the SIIO is the appropriate contact, which office or individual should be contacted?
- Which categories of objectionable conduct are managed by each ministry with responsibilities or authorities for managing Internet content?

3. USA agrees that having a n information from SIIO foreign websites are blocked while sharing IP addresses.
- What is the explanation of all this?
- Are there any ways that China can filter to avoid inadvertent website blockages?
- Are Chinese authorities able to consider reasonable in notifying the owners of the host or sites, can web site hosting service ensure that the other sites are inadvertently blocked?
- What steps should be taken in considering reasonable notifying, can website ensure the other sites to be blocked?

4. State council has issued some measures for the administration in order to describe some content categories which may not be disseminated by service providers. Two additional categories of the content issued by Ministry of information and State Council may not be transmitted. United States is seeking clarity upon the broad nature of the categories.
- If there any laws, policies and regulations or other guidance able to establish criteria in determining whether the content fits eleven categories or not.
- Are government orders or requests filtering specific terms communicated directly to Internet information? If yes, then how are directives communicated? Are these requests made publicly?

5. According to the information coming from White Paper in China “business operators and Internet information service providers establish web security and utilize technical measures for the transmission of all types of illegal information ”.
- How is illegal information defined in this instance?
- Is a written governmental order required for a private corporation or a relevant authority to block the transmission of illegal information?
- What types of technical measures do service suppliers expect to use to prevent transmission of the illegal information? Do authorities in China approve specific technical measures? If so, which ministry does this?

WTO put China in situation required to appear and answer all the questions. It puts Chinese government in some kind of a tricky position. The funny thing about censorship is that people who know the rules of the game can make it effective.

Opinion and analysis
US-China relations at WTO become more and more clear. A growing pattern of WTO disputes between two countries pay attention to China’s censorship policy.

It should be noted US has never alleged there should be a practice of censorship. The decision to practice censorship is a matter of internal policy of China because being a sovereign state it must decided between people and government of the country. Taking into account that the Chinese censorship impacts trade relations with other countries the censorship regime should be not so strict and more transparent.

Share

Beijing October 20, 2011 (Associated Press)

Thursday, October 27th, 2011
Share

Internet censorship disputes has come over the serious level, now these issues are being discussed among governmental representatives. Particularly, China’s Foreign Ministry now is defending these questions in the government debuts. They consider basic U.S. policy as an unfair trade barrier.

During the recent discussions Chinese Foreign Ministry Jiang Yu said nothing about issues concerning internet censorship in U.S. direction. Instead he declared Chine regulates all the questions concerning Internet censorship and its development in international practice. U.S. representatives recently declared that Washington now uses World Trade Organization in order to seek data of China’s actions in the censorship direction. Most American companies complain about blockings and high level of competitiveness.

Share

VPN in Australia | How to observe Netflix & Hulu in Australia

Tuesday, October 25th, 2011
Share
Australia

Australia

Internet censorship is hot topic for the present time, in every country there exist a policy trying to settle up censorship in this or that way. In Australia and there have been great debates concerning censorship in different sites, representatives of The Senate have largely discussed this theme. Australian government declared a notice by the means of Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

In its frames information about Internet usage monitoring is being observed, and also it does not permit users to pass through Internet filters. The restriction is initially constituted for restraining child abusing , pornography and adult content and many others websites. Some people get start in finding people in overcoming some censorship issues. This people like to get access for different websites being blocked and geographically restricted in Us and some other countries. Among streaming websites one can find Hulu, Netflix and others. On the whole these websites are blocked because they are based in the American net and according to copyright laws they are not able to provide some services. Let’s go on. How do users usually get through geo-blocks and Internet censorship? Are there any ways out for bypassing firewalls and some blocks. There are several ways which can help users to enjoy the networld without being confined.

Let’s take VPN services and Proxy services. To overcome Internet censorship issues it is necessary to count the tools integrated with the ISP. Proxy service is not a good option for those looking videos from Hulu and some other on-line websites. Proxy is not so safe as it transmits data in insecure channels. So we see that VPN is the best option for dealing with. It allows user to be used. It transmits Internet censorship, it can be accessed from Australia in certain part of the world. VPN directs users data in an encrypted tunnel, which does not secure them but also helps to bypass censorship.

VPN service is also useful in watching Hulu and Netflix far away from the US borders e.g. with the help of US VPN Netflix. It greatly secures identity, data and some other type of communications from phishing attacks. It is very alarming for users in case they are eager to know you are using a secure channel for communication with the world. If the Internet data passes through the VPN data becomes much safer and quiet. It is essential to get Best Australia VPN. It is very important to make a right choice , there are hundreds of VPN providers in the market. We can provide you the list of TOP5 VPN providers in Australia.

The table bellow shows 5 best VPNs that are sorted by Alexa Rank (monthly site visitors)

Rank

Name Start price
1 Hidemyass $11.52/Month
2 StrongVPN $9.95/Month
3 PureVPN $9.95/Month
4 SmartHide $9.97/Month
5 ExpressVPN $12.95/Month

Share